Posts by Matt Bryant

Server makers start pushing Opteron 6200 tin

Where's the scale up?

Whilst I applaud hp's support for the new Opterons, I have to wonder why the hp contribution stops at four sockets (DL585)? Where's the new eight-socket option to replace the old DL785 G6 and match the Xeon-based Giant Prolaint DL980? With hp already planning to use the Superdome2 tech to produce am ultrafast 32-socket Xeon server, the new Opteron offering appears a bit limited in scale up.

I'm not surprised Snoreacle aren't making any new Opteron boxes though, as it would be far too easy to compare a 16-core Opteron with a 16-core T-whatever, especially as the Opteron option would probably be far cheaper.

Manning to get day in court

RE: @Matt Bryant

"....they were authorised to wake him to check he was ok any time at which they couldn't see his face....." Yes, which completely misses the simple fact you simply can't say how many times they actually did wake him. For all you know, he could have got an uninterrupted eight hours every night. Please post some proof in the form of a record (and the Marine guards will have logged every time they had to wake him) of how many times Manning was awkened. I think you'll find the logs were made available to the prosecution but - strangely, eh? - they have never been keen to back up their claims that Manning was constantly woken.

I especially like the hysterical tone of the webpage you linked to: ".....He was forced to sit in essential blindness...." If his vision was that bad without glasses he would never have been accepted for service! The page is just more bleating, completly ignoring the crimes Manning is charged with and the simple fact - HIS ACTIONS PUT HIM WHERE HE IS NOW.

RE: Re: RE: Only following orders?

"So the US Military investigates the actions of the US Military...." Apart from the fact the investigation went further than just the US Military, it is easy to show the stupidity of your reasoning as paulc's original "only following orders" post includes the bit where the US Military were prosceting US personnel that had committed crimes, so it would seem blatently obvious (to nonsheeple, anyway) that the US MIlitary investigating the US Military DOES result in actual warcrimes being punished. So funny when you can show up one bleater with another one's posts!

QED, you are talking more fail out of your rectum yet again.

RE: To understand the background to the Bradley Manning trial

Quoting Goebbels? Great, educational, might even make a few people think you're smart. But has SFA to do with the Manning case. You are clearly all out of facts if you're off quoting WW2 trivia. What am I saying - you never had any facts to back up your rediculous posts in the first place! Since your posts do little more than amuse (in a "look how STUPID this guy is!" kinda way), I'll leave you with a quote much more pertinent to both Manning and yourself (and seen quite often on 4chan, so I assume you'll be quite familiar with it):

KRUSTY THE CLOWN to MELVIN VAN HORNE: "You, sir, are an idiot!"

Enjoy!

RE: Hands up

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the current case. Manning was not caught saving Jews from the gaschambers or trying to kill a maniac dictator, he was caught passing secrets he had taken an oath to protect. Your clear inability to find perspective just shows your whole mental process is completely lacking in any form of coherent thought. Please take a chill pill, go away and actually THINK about what is being discussed.

RE: Only following orders?

LOL! Which completely misses the fact the Apache "massacare" was investigated and shown not to be a "warcrime", and the US released the reports into the investigations on April 5th 2010 (same day as the Wikileaks edited vid went out). There was no attempt at a cover up, no denial of the events happening, and full legal review of the matter. So, by highlighting the fact that the US military DOES investigate and prosecute warcrimes committed by US troops, you have merely shown that these are NOT warcrimes. Major fail! I seriously hope for Manning's sale that his legal team are a lot sharper than the sheeple posting nonsense in his support here.

RE: teebie

"....Depriving them of sleep is not." Yeah, and where does it say he was deprived of sleep? I mean, where in a sensible piece not scrawled out for the sheeple? The rules are quite simple - the guard has to check every fifteen minutes, they do not wake him up every fifteen minutes UNLESS they have a reason to think he has endangered himself. Please try and grasp that simple point before bleating any further rubbish.

RE: We should remember the first, video, leak ...

Wow! The tinfoil is beyond tight with this one, it's in-grown!

"....which numerous civilians and children were randomly shot and murdered...." The "civillians" included armed millitia, the press crew involved were NOT wearing their identifying jackets, and the children in the van could not be seen by the Apache crew. No-one was "randomly" shot at, the only shooting was in-line with the rules of engagement. Have you even seen the (massively-edited) Wikileaks video? Or do you just bleat whatever you get told to without question?

And what has it got to do with a campus cop spraying pepperspray on US Davis students!!?!??!!? WTF? IMHO, you really are just desperate and very short of a clue, and say nothing that doesn't make Manning supporters look dumb.

RE: "the chopper crew ... got clearance to fire from a senior officer"

Rules of engagement are drawn up by lawyers, not troops on the ground (or in Apaches). They are based on political guidelines drawn up by civil servants and politicians. They are balanced with international law to ensure they are legally in-line with international treaties. They are set so that troops can protect themsleves without unnecessarily endangering themselves or others. Troops that break the RoE are subject to military law as well as civil law, including trial for murder. Troops do have a right to protect themsleves and their fellow troops. But expecting you to know that would probably be asking far too much.

RE: So your correction is

They were not unarmed, as stated in the article. It also did not set the context that the armed group were moving towards US soldiers which the chopper crew were protecting. Would you like me to draw you a diagram, in crayon perhaps?

RE: @Matt Bryant

"Are you suicidal? No? Ok....." Except that DIDN'T HAPPEN. The guards simply had to check if he was OK, they did not have to and did not wake him every fifteen minutes. The only people repeating that nonsense are either guillible or are herding the sheeple.

RE: Where's MB? Oh, anon coward posts perhaps? Anyway....

I see you are not only uninformed but also too short-sighted to see my posts. Maybe you should get help with reading these forums? Or just help in general.

"....Charge him...." Manning was originally charged in July 2010, he was further charged with 22 more counts in March this year. The fact that you don't even know those most basic of facts makes your hyperventillating nothing more than the most childish of bleatings. Please leave the discussion to the adults, before you make yourself look any more stupid.

RE: Paranoid Yanks

As trolling efforts go, that was plain embarrassing! I'm gonna have to report you to the union.

"This man should be praised for doing the right thing!...." I'm guessing your definition of "right thing" is shaped purely by your politics, and has no knowledge of the military laws that Manning agreed to obey and then broke?

".....It'll be the republicans stirring the pot again...." Oh, come on, even a child troll should be able to do better than that! It's so easily debunked (Manning arrested May 2010, Obama inaugerated January 2009......) as to be laughably feeble. If that's your best effort you might as well give up now.

Correction.

"....which showed a helicopter attack in Baghdad in 2007 targeting unarmed civilians...." The crew of Crazyhorse 1-8 believed they were attacking armed militia moving into position to attack US troops on the ground who were conducting anti-militia operations in the area. As it turned out, two of the group attacked were carrying weapons (an AK47 and an RPG-7), and the Reuters TV crew were mistaken for an anti-tank missile crew. At all times, the chopper crew followed the rules of engagement and got clearance to fire from a senior officer. Please at least try and get the basics right.

RE: And about time too!

Oh dear, there are none so blind as those wilfully too stupid to see.

"....ridiculous "suicide watch" behaviour...." Still peddling that old pile of male bovine manure? Shall we re-cap, just so you can get some perspective? Manning had already been considered a a potential suicide risk BEFORE he was even suspected of being the leaker. His superior officer ordered his personal weapon be taken away to reduce the risk of Manning blowing his own brains out. Comprendez? Suicide watch has set procedures, it wasn't made up for Manning, and it was intended to keep him from harming himself. Get over your petty paranoia.

RE: What a farce.

You are forgetting, the main case against Manning just needs to show he broke his military oath and he wilfully acted in violation of the security procedures inherent with his position. The rest (Espionage Act bits) is more about tying him to Wikileaks and thus to A$$nut. The reason it has taken so long to come to trial is the prosecution wanted to get evidence of communications with Wikileaks prior to the act, so they can show Wikileaks (and hopefully A$$nut) were not the surprised beneficiaries of some spontaneous act, but planned the act with Manning. The real target here is Wikileaks and A$$nut, Manning is just collateral damage caused by his own petulance and desire for attention.

RE: ..."open, except when classified information is being discussed"

Only if you're stupid enough to pay for it through A$$nut's paywall. Please don't forget that A$$nut's "nble intent" is using your faux outrage to line his own pocket.

Sparc M4 chips etched by Oracle, not Fujitsu

RE: Billl

LOL! One has to applaud such a comprehensive de-FUDding! Excellent riposte, Mr Billl.

Of course, one does have to question whether T4 being "truly dynamic" will help it in the market, seeing as the single-threaded performance with today's heavy-single-thread apps is likely to be less than the Pee5 mentioned.....

RE: swap anyone?

LOL, I think you'll find that hp's service engineers will have a bit more developed process than that. For a start, there will be no need to pull off heatsinks as the CPU will come as a module with the heatsink attached, just like Xeons do now.... Please remember not all vendors have as ropey upgrade practices as It's Being Mended.

But, you have missed an interesting point - who is going to advise all those old Sun shops on upgrades from existing Sun kit? Snoreacle have severely annoyed the channel (for example, one of our old Sun-only resellers is now trying to flog us hp and CISCO instead), and they have not built up the salesforce Larry said they would, so there's currently much more of a chance that it will be hp or IBM resellers (or direct) whispering sweet promises in those ex-Sun customers' ears.

RE: not true

Erm, changing "the book" is ripping the heart out of the system! All that's left is the frame. Thanks for pointing out that the next two gen of Itanium will be pin-compatible with current Tukzilla kit, which means all you do is add the new CPUs and enjoy the benefits, something that will definately NOT be the case with Pee8. And please stop the babbling about glueless sockets, it's getting very boring. Hp have now lab-tested, approved and are shipping hp-ux on the Superdome2 all the way to 128-cores, as reported here on The Reg (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/06/superdome_hp_ux_update/), despite you continually assuring us this would never happen. Were you too busy rip'n'replacing all those Pee5 books to notice?

Pot, meet Kettle!

Love the bit where the IBM slide says "these are not real M systems and will require a chassis swap" - every generation of Power has required a chassis swap!

US stealth bombers finally get nuke-nobbling super bomb

RE: @Matt Bryant

".....People in power do not want martyrdom....." Agreed, they usually want more power. But, it's just like the guy who likes speed and ends up going too fast on his bike - they may chase power too hard and end up with a nucleur crash! The guy on his bike didn't set out intending to crash and kill himslef, he just waned to go faster miscalculates. Those power-hungry Imams in Iran also seem to believe that attacking Israel will make them heroes in the eyes of other Shia groups and possibly Sunnis as well. Maybe they think that having nuke bombs would mean they could then manouvere against "friendly" countries like Saudi Arabia or Bahrain more openly, believing that nukes would allow them to ignore the UN, the West, and/or Russia and China. What happens if they miscalculate and make a nucleur error?

What happens if they decide they can nuke Israel with impunity, because they think the UN is too weak to retaliate? What would be the UN's course of action if a first strike by Iran did knock out Israel's own ability to retaliate, would you then be happy for a UN force to enter Iran and remove the remaining Iranian nukes and put the Iranian regime on trial? What if the UN Security Council agrees but Muslim countries in the UN General Council decline to assist in punishing Iran? What if the West decides to go it alone and invades Iran anyway, against the wishes of those Msulim countries? So then we have millions of dead Israelis (and Israeli Arabs in that number) possibly plenty of irradiated Arabs in neighbouring countries, and then probably hundreds of thousands killed in any invasion of Iran.

Seems a lot more sensible just to make Iran stick to the treaty obligations they have already signed up to but are deliberately flaunting, stop them developing nuke weapons, and avoid several million deaths. Iran has zero reason to need nukes, the fact that Israel already has them is immaterial as Israel has had them for decades, and not used them even against Arab neighbours intent on wiping them out (such as Syria). There is also zero chance of a neighbour mounting a land invasion of Iran, and if they did so then Iran would have the right as a full UN member to insist on UN assistance to repell any invading force (which is what happened with Kuwait when Saddam invaded).

"....all the current US and EU sanctions do is propping up the Iranian regime." Wrong! Apart from stopping them having an easy time developing nukes, it is suppressing Iranian economic development. It is telling that Iranians protesting in Tehran this year were pointing out the fact that neighbouring countries with better international relations (such as Qatar) had a much higher standard of living than Iran. The more the Iranian government supprsesses the protesters the more disatisfied the people get, the more likely it is that the government will fall. The Obumbler probably hopes he can trigger an "Orange" revolution in Iran without needing to risk US troops on the ground, but he probably woun't like the idea that the Imams might have a last resort of trying to start a major Mid East war by launching a nuke strike on Israel or Saudi Arabia.

RE: @ Bomber Bryant

Ah, too funny for words!

"I am gratified to learn you are less than amused, but stang, by my words....." No stinging, just the amusement. I've had harder debates with a five-year-old.

"....You are confused ~ I never mentioned airbags..." True, that was another member of the sheeple posting in this thread. I must apologise to him that I should grant you any original thought, especially seeing as it must have been quite a strain for him to come up with that one. On the other hand, I did ask you to disprove Mr Page's article, which you failed to do.

".....I provided an informed and reliable source [Payvand] refuting his ludicrous propaganda...." Nope, Page's article is based around the weapon (are you contending that does not exist?) and it's likely uses given the recent UN report (or are you denying that report exists or its contents?). Your sources disprove nothing. A Wikileaks cable suggesting Amano is US-friendly does not disprove the UN report one iota. You also didn't read your own Christian Scientist article, because right at the bottom it says the technical nature of the report would make it hard for any bias on Amano's part to make any difference! The Wiki page for the Iranian nuke program includes the simple statement "The IAEA Board of Governors has found Iran in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement", and then you quote an Iranian article about El Baradei's problems with US policy, neglecting to mention that the same article mentions Amano only hardened his tone over time! Please do tell how Mr Payvand is somehow a greater authority than the IAEA? In short, you have disproven nothing, only shown the shallowness of your case. "Asano is pro-American, therefore the whole UN report can be ignored!" Major fail!

"....What's an "innocent" industry..." Why aren't petrochemical plants required for Iran's top export - oil - being built under mountains? After all, if those nasty Yanks/Brits/Jews want to hurt Iran, they're bound to bomb the oil infrastructure, isn't that what the Ayatollah claims?

"....You are hilarious...." What's so hilarious about suggesting the Iranians should abide by their NNP Treaty obligations, allow inspections, and site their nuke power sites in the open where they can be checked by satellite? Oh, I see the funny bit - the chance the Iranians would agree! Especially as you're so certain they have nothing to hide, so why don't they allow the inspections? Of course, it couldn't be that Iran is looking at North Korea and seeing how they are making an income out of weapon programs, and fancy exporting nuke weapons to all those other not-so-nice dictatorships even Russia and China wouldn't sell them to...

"....as you're a tub-thumping racist...." Ah, slander and all! Please do point out any racist comment I have posted. By the way, Iran is a country, Iranian is a nationality, and Muslim is not a race either, so I'm pretty sure you're going to be on a hiding to nothing with any claim you make there, but please do try and make them all the same! I'm also pretty sure the forum moderator would block a racist post. So it looks like more evasions from you - losing the argument, can't answer the questions, just claim racism! Yet another fail.

"....do you concede that manufacturing medical radioisotopes is a civilian purpose...." You don't need the massive number of centrifuges being built by Iran to make the tiny number of medical isotopes required by Iranian medical research or hospitals, you could do that as you say with the existing equipment. In fact, you could openly buy any extra isotopes on the international market for a tiny fraction of the cost of all those centrifuges, let alone the immense cost of building nuke plants and centrifuges under mountains. That was less than weak, that was downright childish. Yet more fail!

"....Iran, with the help of Argentina, in 1993 converted this reactor to use the lower grade fuel...." They had to - no-one was willing to give them high-grade material, not even the Russians. But, your point is even more damning - if they can run on low-grade fuel, why do they need to process to a higher level at all, surely all they need to do is pay the Russians for a licence and build more low-grade stations? Then you can have one common design and all the power you need, without the West or anyone else getting alarmed. Oh, but then you couldn't make proper nuke weapons, only low-grade dirty bombs. Sorry, you fail again!

"....predicted in fiction by Kurt Vonnegut...." Really? And I though all your post was an original work of fiction! Bit sad that you're ripping off old Vonnegut, did you get an adult to read it to you? Me, I spend more time reading real World news and events and history, it helps with that whole grasp on reality thing you have problems with. Please do enjoy your works of fiction, just don't post your fiction here and think the rest of us will see them as anything more than fairytales.

"....Yes, your unbounded bravery..." I see you haven't supplied any details of any worthwhile action on your own part. By the way, I'm trying real hard to look surprised, honest!

"....regardless who built or knocked down any particular wall...." Hey, you started with the label-gun, don't expect others to not point out the stupidity in your chain of half-thought if you starting spraying labels all over the place!

"....Imperialism exists and you are a typical example of its noxious effects on the mind...." Now that is the genuine paranoia you get from Iranians, the leap to thinking that everyone is just itching to take over Iran and impose some form of Imperial slavery upon the poor Iranians. It has always made me smile, the number of even educated Iranians I work with that insist that Britain is desperate to regain imperial rule over Iran. To be honest, if the Iranians wanted to keep themselves to themselves I'd be quite happy to let them have all the low-grade nuke stations they could want. Even if they stayed being the beligerant, ranting, paranoid child of the Mid East, I'd still not begrudge them low-grade nuke stations as it could only improve their lives, and nothing is more likely to bring an end to the rule of the Ayatollahs like a bit of economic development. But I'm just not keen on them having access to nuke weapons. Nothing to do with imperialism. That's just you leaping to pat conclusions due to your own preconceptions, probably tainted also with more of the "can't win the argument so start the name-calling" reflex. So, just more fail on your part.

So, in summary - you haven't disproven anything in the article; the "sources" you supplied counter your own arguments; and you can't write a paragraph without wandering off into what looks like Robert Mugabe's fantasyland of imperialist whiteman's plots. You, sir, are the pinnacle of fail! You really are quite comic! I'm not surprised you want to take the discussion off-forum seeing as you have given so little in any form of argument here. To put it simply, put up or shut up, just try and include some facts in your next post.

RE: @Ian Michael Gumby

"....Lucky or not, the nukes are not going to go away...." Your logic is flawed, it presumes that all people armed with nukes would behave the same way. It's like saying the guard in a prison for the criminally insane has a gun, so all the violent and disturbed prisoners should also be given guns because you say they are just as likely not to use it as the guard. Obviously, if you were in the room with one of those prisoners, and I gave him a gun, I doubt if you would be so happy that he wouldn't use it. Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't, but you'd be gambling with your life. People are not all the same, they don't all follow the same processes, have the same beliefs, or think and act the same way. You presume they do. If you are wrong, millions people could die. You so sure you want to take the chance? You might think the prisoner may be in there for another reason and not actually be violent. Would you still be comfortable if I told you the prisoner had told kids it was their Islamic duty to walk into a minefield and told them they'd go straight to heaven if they exploded a mine? Kinda sets the tone, doesn't it?

"....That's a highly questionable statement...." Saddam did have both chemical and nuke weapon programs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_chemical_weapons_program). He did use chemicals against his own people and Iran, and it's higly likely he would have used a nuke against US bases in Saudi Arabia if he had had one to hand. Only UN sanctions stopped vital elements (such as the trigger circuits seized at Heathrow in 1990, http://articles.latimes.com/1990-03-28/news/mn-369_1_nuclear-weapon) getting to Iraq. Plenty of people assured us Saddam was just as unlikely to use either before the evidence of the use of chemical weapons at Halabjah and in the Iran-Iraq war broke. I suggest you try asking the Kurds if they think that, if we could go back in time, Saddam should be given the benefit of the doubt again.

"....to my knowledge there is not a single country in the world which is driven by desire of self-destruction...." We're not talking the whole country, but we are talking a large number of the people in power in Iran, that do seem to belive in the Twelfth Imam. Try reading up on the Basij, of which Ahm-mad-in-a-dinnerjacket is the leading light. He was also reputedly involved in the plastic keys idea outlined above, which shows he is either pretty fanatical, ruthless and/or exploitative. Still so sure you want him to have access to nuke weapons?

You should also have noticed two facts - the Iranian rulers think constant confrontation with the West is going to unite Iran and prop up their unpopular regime; and they think war with Israel will unite the common Arab on their side. As historic background, the Islamic Revolution in Iran was struggling up until the Iraqis invaded. The country united behind the Imams to fight Saddam's forces. Ever since, the Imams have painted every disagreement with the West/UN/World as some big conspiracy in an attempt to forge the same "all Iranians standing as brothers" attitude. Or as some Jewish conspiracy. Or both. The language Ahm-mad-in-a-dinnerjacket uses is all the same - Iranians must stand together to stop the West/Jews imposing this, that or the other and siezing Iran's oil, etc, etc, etc. The same language comes from the Ayatollah Khamanei, only even more strident. Throughout the Mid East, governments use Israel as a bogeyman in an attempt to weld their citizens with a common cause. Iran is no different, only they have taken demonising Israel to heights even the Arab regimes are impressed by. The trouble is somewhere in the game of brinkmanship the Iranians are very likely to either strike Israel directly, or give one of their puppets (probably Hezbollah) the means to. What happens if a nuke-tipped Scud is launched into Israel from Lebanon? Would you like to take the chance that could not happen, especially as the Iranians have shown no qualms at giving Hezbollah (and Hamas) rockets to deliberately fire at Israelli civillian targets?

But that's all considering it as nice and far away in the Mid East, and the only victims would be those awful Jews, yes? What if Iran gave a nuke to a terrorist group? They're currenty giving plenty of money and training to terrorists in Afghanistan to kill Westerners. But Iran has a history of striking far further afield, especialy through proxies, such as the AMIA bombing in Argentina or the El Descanso bombing in Spain. What happens if that nuke could be shipped to your town, and it's you and your family and friends that could get vapourised? Still so sure you want to take the chance? After all, you're so sure they'd act responsibly, just as if they'd had the same upbringing and values as you, but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't plant a bomb in a Spanish resteraunt, would you?

Like you say, the genie is out of the bottle, but that doesn't mean we should let everyone have the genie. We can always make it difficult for those that might wish for bad things, and Iran signed up to the Nucleur Non-Proliferation Treaty but haven't kept to their commitments under it, which means they shouldn't be allowed to play with the genie. In fact, they have been shown to want to own the genie themselves and brag about the bad wishes they have in mind. Are you really sure you want to take the chance? I'm not.

RE: @Matt Bryant

Because I have actually lived, worked and travelled in many parts of the Mid East. It is quite telling that even the Egyptians in Cairo, despite their often blaming all types of ills on the "devil" Israelis, don't think they would use atomic bombs to attack Egypt, but are seriously worried at the idea of Iran getting nuke-tipped missiles. Same goes for the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, even the Cypriots I spoke to this year.

/everything-go-glowy icon, natch.

RE: Fun is a function of perspective

"If such gutless wonders as Hardon Page...." Lew Page has a previous career as a Royal Navy officer, including mine and improvised explosive device disposal, which makes it a fair bet he has far more guts than yourself. True, he does post the odd article of complete nonsense (IMHO), but he can at least claim to have been "at the sharp end". As to myself, I'll just smile, as I'm not telling. Please do explain what great feats of daring you have accomplished, in whatever passes as a "tough time" for you (throwing a fire-extinguisher of a roof at policemen, maybe?).

".....from the relative safety of the swamps these moral midgits infest...." I also travel regularly to areas where terrorism is a daily threat (no, not just Birmingham, I'm talking the Mid East), which means I do often live with the (slim) chance that someone is going to try and blow me up. I'm guessing the greatest danger in your life is crossing the road to the sign for your unemployment cheque.

"....these racist holdovers mired in the imperialist ideology...." If anyone is mired in anything it is your feeble brain, and it is mired in very outdated ideologies not seen since the fall of the Berlin Wall (well, outside of the ivory towers of academia anyway). By the way, the anti-imperialists built the Berlin Wall to keep the East Germans in the supposed "Workers' Paradise", not "imperialist" NATO out, which just about sums up the complete failure of the ideals you seem to hold so dear.

I really hope that you are just some aged and bitter ex-activist, clinging to old copies of Socialist Worker in a vain attempt to find comfort, and seething through your final years in furious denial of the failure of your ilk. It would be really tragic to discover that you actually are a young mind blighted by such foolishness. What a waste that would be.

RE: @Matt Sycophant

Aw, that was almost amusing! Not bad, about the par for the typical, pre-grad, treehugger. Hopefully a few years in the real World may grant you more insight through experience.

"....I note you have no defense for the lies of Mr Page, just a pathetic stab at diversion...." Nope, I expressly asked you to back up your rediculous idea of airbags, which I note you have not been able to do. Who's trying a bit of diversion now? Besides which, you haven't exposed any of Mr Page's piece as a "lie" at all. Please try harder.

"....If your workplace were threatened with bombing by terrorist...." Strange, no other bulding is being buried under a mountain. Why aren't the Iranians - if they're so worried about attacks on "innocent" industries - burying anything else? Could it be they really don't care about the civillians that work in other "innocent" industries, just the ones that work in the "innocent" nuke power arena? Gee, I wonder why that is?

"....Are you truly so obtuse as to not grasp that the mountain is a bomb-shelter, not containment?...." Surely the best way to ensure your civillian nuke program would not be bombed would to be to allow the IAEA inspectors the unhindered access the Iranians are actually bound to provide by the Non-Proliferation Traety they signed up to? Or, if your design was the innocent civillian nuke station you claimed it to be, surely having it out in the open where it could be independently verified would be the best idea? Of course, burying it under a mountain stops satellites taking shots of your military nuke program.....

"....your inbred imperialist racism..." LOL! The start of a very predictable rant, replete with the usual empty accusations of white, racist mendacity! I haven't seen so much bilge in one paragraph since I read a translation of Mao's Little Red Book - what a hoot! Please, call me a "running dog lackey of the imperialists", just to really set the tone. To say you have patently lost the argument is demonstrated by your retreat to myopic presumptions and accusations.

Simple new question for you - why not ask yourself why have the Iranians ALREADY refined uranium past the levels required for civilian nucleur power? I'm guessing you'll have just as evasive an answer as you did for the rediculous airbags idea. Please don't feel the need to reply, even though I'm sure it would be just as amusing as your last attempt, just spend the time more fruitfully in a little reading. You seem to have a lot to catch up on. Try some new titles outside the "I hate the US too much to see past my hatred" political arena, you will find it enlightening.

RE: Lies, damned lies and filthy pro-war-criminal propaganda

Please do supply details on exactly how many other peaceful, civillian, nuke power reactors or centrifuge plants are built or are being built under mountains, which would seem a very expensive method of containment compared to the good, old, concrete containment vessel. And please do supply some argument as to what benefit that would provide over traditional construction methods in order to offset the massive added expense. I suggest you get a crowbar to losen your tinfoil hat a bit first, though.

RE: Nukes 4 all = Freedom 4 all

You are rather naively projecting our Westernised concepts of wanting to pretect our own, onto a group of people with a quite different outlook. As an example, these are the people that decided the best way to clear minefields in the Iran-Iraq war was to use children as mine detectors - not give them tools and training to find mines and defuse them, but herd them onto the suspected minefields to clear the way by sacrifice. The children were given little plastic keys (mass imported from Taiwan) and told that it would "open the gates to Heaven" for them should they successfully find a mine.....

MAD only works when both sides want to avoid a the total destruction of their own country. Unfortunately, some in Iran seem to believe that provoking a war with Israel and America is the route to their religeous salvation, so MAD is simply not going to work.

RE: Mr Gumby seems to conveniently forget

Mrhenriday seems to have forgotten history, fullstop.

"....1) the United States is the only nation hitherto to have used nucear weapons in war...." A war started by the other party (Japan), and the dropping of the nukes was to END the war to avoid the millions (of mainly civillian Japanese) that would have died in the otherwise necessary invasion of Japan. It also wasn't the deadliest attack of WW2, the firebombing of Tokyo being more destructive and killing more people, but that is forgotten as it was "conventional" weapons.

".....2) the United States (and inter alia, its favourite satrapy, the UK) and that dog-wagging tail, Israel, have been supporting and waging state terrorism these last six decades and more...." <Yawn> So do all the superpowers, it was how they fought wars by proxy to AVOID having a full-blown nuke war. It's obvious that your rabid anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism blinds you to some very simple truths.

RE: Airbags

"......They'll also have put it in a massive concrete shell, decoupled from the rock of the mountain by air bags......" Yeah, please do supply details of a Western installation of such tech, seeing as it is highly unlikely even with our level of capability, and very, very unlikely with Iran's generally poor level of engineering capability. Then consider that air only suppresses shockwaves when it is not compressed - using it to hold up a "massive concrete shell" will mean air under considerable pressure, which will actually transmit shockwaves quite well (for example, go read up on pneumatic drills).

RE: 90 meters

Digging out entrance tunnels isn't a great problem. What would be much more of a problem for the Iranians would be the shockwave that would be transmitted through the rock to the underground bunkers, and would probably trash most of the high-tech kit like centrifuges without needing to actually penetrate the rooms. To increase the effect, the Septics could use the old "smash 'n' trash" trick used by tanks against thick concrete defences - AP round to crack the surface, followed by an HE round to break it apart. In this case, a MOP strike could be followed up by something like several 5000Lb GBU-28 penetrators to literally break the mountain apart. Both can use GPS or laser guidance to ensure the second attack hits the area of mountain already fractured by the MOP. Or, if the Yanks are feelling brave (and the Iranian air-def really is "puny" and could be suppressed), they could follow up the MOP with a GBU-43/B MOAB dropped from a very unstealthy Herc!

But of course, the handwringers will still be telling us the immense trouble and cost of digging bunkers under a mountain is all a part of the Iranian civillian nuke power scheme.....

Anonymous: 'We hacked cybercop's email'

RE: Ah...

I think you'll find it was the spotty, girlfriendless children which did this hack.....

HP to forge x86 Integrity and Superdome servers

RE: HP-UX and Integrity just got put in the old folks home

Oh dear, Alli, have you been drinking too much rum down by the poolside?

"HP has decreased its R&D from 6% to 2% in recent years....." Really? And how much of that relates to Itanium, Integrity or hp-ux? You can't say. In fact, seeing as your "recent years" fudge is so wide, I'm betting you're comparing over the period when hp had Itanium development in-house (along with the Comapq Alpha-related products) and then comparing to after hp shipped the Itanium/Alpha teams off to Intel. How much of that research budget is for ink products, phones, tablets, PCs, memristor tech? You don't know and wouldn't want to say, because that would poke a big hole in your FUD. It's about as silly a line as me claiming Power is under threat because IBM have been forced to slash their computer lines in half in recent years. Sounds bad for mainframes and Pee series, no? IBM have, but only because they sold the PC and low-end server bizz to Lenovo. A little context goes a long way to poking holes in non-arguments.

"....The next two itanium chips will go into the current system but dont expect an upgrade to the SX3000 chipset...." Maybe that's because the SX3000 chipset was designed to scale across the next two generations from the start, so doesn't need an upgrade. Unlike Power chipsets, which had to be changed for the jump from Pee4 to Pee5, from Pee5 to Pee6, from Pee6 to Pee7, and from Pee7 will have to change AGAIN for Pee8. Maybe IBM should talk to hp about designing a bit more upgradability into their servers? Or maybe IBM just banks on ripping off their customers with every upgrade. After all, every time you upgrade AIX you have to go to the latest Pee-series CPU to get the full benefits, so if IBM are forcing that kind of upgrade burden on their customers I suppose charging them for new motherboards (sorry, "books") isn't much to add to the pain.

"....The "enhancements" needed in xeon are for the non-stop not HP-UX. That will be obviously ported asap. VMS has obviously finally found its end date just like Tru-64....." Love the evidence you give for those wild presumptions. Oh, actually there's no evidence at all! What a surprise - not! Currently, there's a longer public roadmap for all three of hp's Integrity OSs (hp-ux, Nonstop and OpenVMS) than for AIX, and a longer public roadmap for Itanium than Power. Gee, that must mean IBM is getting out of enterprise systems, right?

"...."Nearly all the Itanium engineers, save a small development team working on Poulson and then rotating over to Kittson, have been redeployed on Xeon-related projects,"...." Not surprising, Poulson is taped out and ready to roll, so the development staff have been moved to new projects until the main development phase on Poulson kicks off. By the way, how close to being taped out is Pee8? Oh, it isn't. Best IBM will publicly admit is it is "under development" for release at "an undisclosed date". Ooh, concrete stuff, I can really plan on that then!

Poor Alli, you're obviously suffering from a serious combined case of overwork and sunstroke! Looks like you should have taken a holiday a long time ago.

RE: @Allison Park

"I thought you were in Jamaica feasting on tender lamb ?" Alli probably only took IBM Red Books as reading material, it's the only thing that would make me bored enough to be posting from Jamaica!

Alli, if you're bored and in Kingston, I'd recommend the Quad Club in Trinidad Terrace. Four floors with different music on each, even '70s stuff!

:P

RE: Thats it then...

Was that my cue? Sorry, I was waiting for something worth responding to, but I was falling asleep reading the usual FUD. Anyway, on with the fun!

"Just the 2 more gens of Itanium...." Itanium has Poulsen taped out, Kittson in development. IBM has one more gen of Power "in development", Pee8, which doesn't even have a public release date. Snoreacle are still trying to make T-series actually perform the way us customers want, i.e. with some single-threaded performance, and their roadmap was too late and - frankly - too unbelievable. Sounds like hp-ux and Itanium products have a much sounder future than their competitors.

".....when it's a negative HP story....." LOL! It's a TPM article, he can't write anything about hp without it somehow meaning the death of Itanium. "Meg Whitman went to the bathroom today? Must have been because Itanium is going down the pan...." etc, etc, etc. Please try finding a single one of his articles not written with Big Blue blinkers firmly in-place. The funniest ones are where he paints up slippage on IBM products as "planning" (such as http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2011/10/11/ibm_power_systems_enhancements/). The actual bones of this article is that hp are planning on using the same Superdome2 tech for Xeon, but somehow that massive market advantage (where is the IBM 32-socket Xeon server, or the Snoreacle one?) becomes "Itanium is dead, hp-ux is going to be killed". It's not just a rediculous jump, it's about as far fetched as asking the head of Xeon development at Intel if he will be spending any time on Itanium and then taking his negative answer as an excuse to stop supporting future development of your software on that platform. Now, who would be silly enough to do that?

"....no OS, no Database, No Middleware, no Apps...." Strange, but hp seems to make a lot of money deploying OTHER companies's databases, middleware and apps. In fact, more IBM software is sold by hp for use with hp servers than by IBM itself. Vendor with the largest share of the servers used for Linux? Hp. Ditto for MS Server, SQL and Exchange; Oracle DB and RAC; and SAP. Maybe it's because hp offer the customer choice, whereas IBM (and now Snoreacle) are all about lock-in. Not that hp don't sell their own software, after all the recent hp Software results for 2011included a 28% growth with 27.7% margin in what has been a tough year. I think you'll find that IBM's report for Q3 showed only 13% growth for their software bizz, so hp is growing theirs at more than twice the rate of IBM. Even Oracle only managed 23% software growth in their best quarter this year.

"....Not a hell of a lot of money to be made in pushing tin..." Good thing then that hp has tech like memristors coming down the line. Not to mention that printer and ink bizz that winds up the Sunshiners so much.

RE: I bow before your mathematical genius!

Actually, pricing from hp can be fun. The larger the system and the deal, the bigger the discount you can hammer out of hp. As a comparison of performance-per-quid, the smaller servers actually come out worse as they are less steeply discounted (unless you buy several hundred in a go). It's pretty much the same for all the vendors. At least that holds until you get to discussing support costs, as large servers usually go into business critical roles and so you usually add 24x7 support to them, whereas smaller servers may go into departmental roles and only be on cheaper 9x5 support.

But, as a guide to market penetration, hp claim to have Integrity in 70 of the current Fortune 100 companies, which is more than Snoreacle can claim for T-series, and more than IBM can claim for Pee-series.

RE: Matt?

Sorry, been busy. Some of us do have to work for a living, you know! Well, every now and again at least.

Terry Pratchett computer sniper-scope: Spec-ops mini version

RE: How long before...

More likely would be a laser-seeking round for the XM-25. The rounds the gun fires are 25mm in diameter, which would seem to be plenty to build in a miniature seeker head and maybe leave enough room for a small explosive charge. The built in ballistic computer in the XM-25 scope would get the shot as close to a direct hit, a simple laser preojector unit would provide the guidance spot, leaving the bullet the minimal amount of terminal manouvering to get that first round hit.

McKinnon's mum wins human rights gong

About as deserved as The Obumbler's Nobel Prize.

So, she had zero interest or activities in "human rights" until her son was caught up in an extradition case, and then all she has done is pursue a course totally aligned to her own interests (her son's continued liberty). Yeah, a real campaigner for human rights - not! All she has "campaigned for" is the right of one human she gave birth to (but obviously didn't do a very good job of mothering). It must really annoy those that actually do work hard for others that this shameless bit of political self-promotion has grown to the point where Janis Sharp is actually getting an award.

Oracle dubs Solaris 11 world's 'first cloud OS'

RE: VMware vs Containers

".....Similar to nPar....." Kebbie, nPars are true hardware partitioning, a real "share-nothing" environment, something no form of Slowaris partitioning can do, period. Containers has an underlying layer (like Xen or ESX) that does the virtualisation, and that is a shared SPOF. With nPars, the hardware is electrically isolated, there is no underlying virtualisation layer, so I can blitz one nPar with absolutley zero effect on the others. All the available CPU and RAM is used by the OS instances installed on the nPars, none by the virtualisation.

".....One guy booted up 1.000 Containers on a Solaris PC with 1GB RAM...." <Yawn> So what? There is a minimum amount of RAM for Integrity VMs hardcoded to 512MB for a reason - anything smaller is really irrellevant. TBH, 512MB is pretty useless for real systems. You used to be able to make IVMs with as little as 100MB of RAM, but there was simply no enterprise role that could be completed with such a tiny amount of memory. In reality (I know, you don't go there much, but you should aspire to), practical VMs for us start with about 8GB of RAM (we do a lot of Oracle, it needs lots of memory) and a typical IVM has 16GB in our environment. Your "1000 containers" is just like a lot of your Snoreacle benchmarks - completely pointless and only of amusement value.

".....As they said, negligible overhead....." Except for the resources chewed up by the underlying virtualisation layer, which is a full-fat Slowaris instance. Nothing "negligable" there! Slowaris simply does not have a "zero overhead" virtualisation option.

RE: Did Mark Hurd use Siri?

Mr Hurd obviously likes having a minion to do everything for him, it's so below him to have to click for himself, so instead he barks at a marketting minion and they select the next slide for him. Probably a blonde marketting minion that used to make soft-core pr0n movies, going by his previous hiring patterns.....

Assange hires Pirate Bay lawyer

RE: Do remember, Kelly, that Mr Assange appeared voluntarily at a London police station

.... to avoid being immediatley arrested by the UK Police, which would have made the fast-tracking of his extraditiion to Sweden much more likely. Do not confuse a tactical move to avoid arrest as an act of innocence. A$$nut knew that if he avoided trouble with the UK Police he could then draw out the extradition proceedings almost indefinately. Well, up to the point he's reached now.

".....tried as it was before judges who are members of societies sponsored by so-called «rights-holders» organisations...." Oooh, loosen up the tinfoil hat! Last time I heard, there were much more powerful lobbies in the Swedish political system than Sony and EMI. Your sense of perspective is so out of whack it's downright funny!

".....given the forces arrayed against him...." I would suggest that should be given the scale of the alleged yet damning facts of the case arrayed against him, A$$nut is going down! And please do explain what it is you see as "the good fight", just for our amusement.

A fail of truly farcial proportions.

<Yawn>

There's troubled, there's desperate, and then there's A$$nut! Looks like an attempt to gain sympathy with the crackerz and pirates. "Go" icon, as in "Please go grow a pair and go away to Sweden, you irritating, sycophantic man."

US nuclear aircraft carrier George Bush crippled by toilet outages

RE: IN NELSONS TIME.....

Not just Nelsonsonian times! A grand relative served on one of the Insect class gunboats during WW2 in the Med, and told me they had two "heads" - effectively canvas-covered frames over a plank - hanging over the stern, and that for a crew of over fifty!

London councils to spunk £25m on SAP deal

RE: Does anyone know

Last two SAP roll-outs went fine, in budget and even ahead of schedule. Initial SAP implementation was another story (almost a year behind schedule, about 20% overbudget, and with half the savings lost because features we'd wanted couldn't be implemented on time), but the learning curve on that initial jaunt helped us plan more realisticly since. A strong project manager with real SAP knowledge, and with a high-powered cattleprod to keep the beancounters in check, seems to be key.

Assange takes extradition fight to Supreme Court

RE: Correction.

"......You seem to be suggesting that he's not entitled to due process because of this?"

You seem to be suggesting that because A$$nut's politics align with your own anit-Americanism, he should be treated as above the law regardless of which country he is in.

RE: A waste of time? Unfortunately not...

"......So if he has the money to appeal....." Unfortunately, the court costs paid by A$$ange do not cover the whole cost of the fiasco, the remainder being paid for out of British taxpayers' money.

RE: AC

Wrong! He is not YET accused of anything, he is being extradited to assist in the investigation of the crime he is suspected of committing. A$$ange failed to co-operate with the Swedes, hence the request for his extradition to face questioning.

RE: @AC 23:03

You really are one of the less intelligent Wikisuckers, aren't you? This is an European warrant from Sweden - nothing to do (yet) with the US. Please do try and at least keep up with the basics before frothing.