Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Update — Sensors Do Not Pick Up North Korean Radioactivity

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the better-than-any-other-radiation-ever-created dept.

Japan 132

Update: 02/19 20:49 GMT by S : The story below has been retracted upon further examination of the research. There has been no detection of radioactivity.
gbrumfiel writes "A global network of sensors has picked up faint traces of radioactive gas that probably seeped from last week's underground nuclear test by North Korea. The detection of xenon-133 in Japan and Russia provides further evidence of the nuclear nature of the test, but offers no hint as to the type of weapon used. Atmospheric modelling by the Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics in Vienna shows that the gas likely seeped from North Korea's test site on 15 February, three days after the original test. That indicates that the test was well sealed deep underground."

cancel ×

132 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947477)

I don't know, guys, after watching this video from KCNA news [youtube.com] I'm kind of concerned. I mean the United States' air force is being overrun with cost and we've only built 63 F-35 aircraft [wikipedia.org] . How can that stand up to the DPRK's 40 Chengdu F-7s?! And defending Pyongyang they have 40 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29s! 40 + 40 = 70 and 70 > 63!!!

In the video, you can see the pilot explain that they will reduce me to ash! TO ASH! And they only need six minutes! Look at how hard he must have studied to learn how to fly a jet fighter, clearly he knows what he's talking about. Apparently I'm guilty of state sponsored terrorism against the North Koreans and I didn't even know it! Welp, I'm withdrawing all my savings and spending it on hookers and blow, for in six minutes we all might be ash. Catchy tune at the end too, that's a real earworm, I'll be whistling that one all the way to the firestorm they are going to unleash on me.

Oh great and powerful Korean People's Army Air Force, please have mercy on my electricity having soul! I knew not what I was terrorizing!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (5, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947539)

How can that stand up to the DPRK's 40 Chengdu F-7s?

Indeed, a Chinese copy of a Soviet airplane that was good in the 1970's would scare a Hornet or Eagle pilot shitless.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947709)

It didn't scare anyone. In fact the MiG-21 is the F-15's only gun kill.
The Hornet too, is the only aircraft o have demonstrated self-escort capability, with two hornets shooting down a pair of MiG-21's that were intercepting them. The Hornets kept their bombs onboard and proceded to complete their mission.

Scared shitless your ass :D

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947833)

I think your sarcasm detector is malfunctioning.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948419)

Clearly he is unable to escort himself through the wilds of Slashdot. Where is his wingman?

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948989)

Where is his wingman?

He went home with the hot chick.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948327)

The problem is that the hornet and eagle pilots are going to run out of ammo at some point, the planes are going to break down, the pilots will have to sleep, long before the Chinese run out of cheap aircraft... The Soviet T-34 was vastly inferior to the German panzers as well. But to some extent it is very much a numbers game. If you feel that technology assures victory where is the Roman empire today?

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (5, Informative)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948601)

The Soviet T-34 was vastly inferior to the German panzers as well.

Umm, no.

The T34/76 was considerably superior to any panzer then extant in 1941, when they were first encountered.

It wasn't until 1944 that the Germans reached the point that the overwhelming majority of Panzers were better than the T34/76.

And at that point, the Russians were building the T34/85, which was rather better than the latest version of Pzkw-4 (which was about half the German panzer inventory), though somewhat inferior to Pzkw-5 (the other half).

The only real weakness the T34 series of tanks had was lack of proper communications equipment (only the company commander's tank had a radio, for instance, until late in the war).

Plus that gawdawful commander's hatch on the earliest T34s....

If you feel that technology assures victory where is the Roman empire today?

If you think that the Roman Empire dominated the Classical World due to superior technology, you know even less of history than your comments about T34 suggest.

Hint: the Legions' doctrine was far more important than the Legions' technology (which was basically the same as everyone else's (iron swords, spear, torso armor and helmet) and considerably inferior to that used by the Persian cavalry at the time (yes, I've always been rather fond of the Persian composite bows as weapons of war - it's really too bad the Romans worked out a counter to it).

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949425)

(yes, I've always been rather fond of the Persian composite bows as weapons of war - it's really too bad the Romans worked out a counter to it).

Yeah; it's called "wet weather"!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949753)

Good post. Since you do know your history, here's a very interesting set of comments on the other shortcomings of the T-34 by a Soviet tanker who used the Sherman. (HVSS 76mm)
http://english.iremember.ru/tankers/17-dmitriy-loza.html [iremember.ru]

Please note I'm not saying the T-34 was 'bad' either. This isn't that sort of post, just a sincere 'more information you'd like'. I'd only add you might want to look further into the ability of the 85mm (more like middle range contemporary HV 75mm), since too many people think it's stronger than it was. But you may have already done that. Cheers.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949883)

You're full of shit. the t34 tank was a joke compared to tanks of the day.

It's one feature was THEY BUILT A FUCKTON OF THEM!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950127)

The Roman expansion seemed to have stopped whenever they ran into cavalry-heavy enemies. They got to Asia Minor, but not into the steppe beyond. Enemies not fighting ordered battles might have been somewhat detrimental to Legion tactics. Hit and run, deny an orderly battle - asymmetric warfare of the ancient world if you like. Not that they ventured often into those territories, but if I recall correctly, whenever they did, it was without significant success.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950961)

The Roman expansion seemed to have stopped whenever they ran into cavalry-heavy enemies.

The Romans conquered the Persians at one point. Couldn't make it stick for more than a generation, but they managed.

They also conquered Spain and France. Against those barbarians that you think beat them.

The Romans did NOT successfully defeat the Germans, of course. Teutoberger Wald wasn't actually a case of "asymmetric warfare", since it involved a large Roman Army and a larger German Army (and a stupid Roman General, which was the real cause of the Roman defeat).

Of course the Romans never made a serious effort to conquer Germany. Why bother? The place was a worthless hellhole. Even Big Julie (who led punitive expeditions into Germany a couple of times) didn't think it was worth conquering. And the later Roman generals who led punitive expeditions into Germany whenever the Germans bothered the Romans living in France at the time didn't think Germany was worth bothering to conquer.

Not that they ventured often into those territories, but if I recall correctly, whenever they did, it was without significant success.

You don't recall correctly.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

VAXcat (674775) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948671)

Commenting on the reported much higher quality of the Nazi's armaments, Stalin is reported to have said "Quantity has a quality all its own".

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948813)

The problem is that the hornet and eagle pilots are going to run out of ammo at some point, the planes are going to break down, the pilots will have to sleep, long before the Chinese run out of cheap aircraft...

\

Well no. No they won't. Have you seen our military budget? Have you seen our military technology? Are you not aware that the USA is the world's largest arms dealer? If we need extra aircraft all we have to do is stop selling them to everyone else.

to some extent it is very much a numbers game.

Yes, that's true. They can afford more losses, but we can deal out more losses.

If you feel that technology assures victory where is the Roman empire today?

Wishing they used less lead in their cosmetics.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42950543)

They are probably also regretting using lead as a sweetener in their wine for all the big parties. Nothing like the wealthy people all going loco.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948819)

The Soviet T-34 was vastly inferior to the German panzers as well. But to some extent it is very much a numbers game. If you feel that technology assures victory where is the Roman empire today?

Sometimes you can't win a war even with superior numbers and technology. Some wars just don't make sense. [wikipedia.org]
For others the weather decides. [wikipedia.org]

And it wasn't exactly war that destroyed the Roman empire, but rather a gradual decline. Yes, the Goth did invade Rome but this was just one point in a much larger process.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949055)

Don't know what you are talking about, Rome fell when the republic died, and kings took power again.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950169)

Yeah, except Rome fell about 400 years later. You could argue that the decline of Rome began with the end of the Republic, but that decline was a drawn out process. It's more of an ideological point. The economically most prosperous years probably were under the Emperors...

I wonder (1)

Shivetya (243324) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950579)

how high up in the chain of command you have to be to realize how hopelessly outclassed you are in North Korea?

As in, do the fighter pilots know? How about their immediate superiors? How far up does one have to be before you really know the truth?

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

eksith (2776419) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947583)

F-35s won't be nearly in enough quantity or with enough distribution to make an effect and even if they were, I think we've pretty clearly established throughout the history of the U.S. technology alone don't win wars. And I do mean "win" I.E. conclude with no further conflict and the unconditional surrender of the enemy.

Only the North Koreans will win against North Korea.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (5, Interesting)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948747)

I think we've pretty clearly established throughout the history of the U.S. technology alone don't win wars.

Actually, we've established that US technology alone NEVER wins wars.

What we've established that wins wars is US production - we didn't win WW2 with superior technology, we won it because we could do things like build a military up from "small" to "fricking huge" while still having enough production surplus to provide weapons/supplies/whatever to everyone else in the world.

Note that one of the most interesting bits of trivia about WW2 is that the USA, during the war, built more aircraft carriers than existed in the entire world before the war.

And, more importantly, we built more transports (Liberty ships, anyone) than existed in the entire world before the war.

In the mid '30s, a German general, doing an analysis of mechanized warfare concepts noted that the USA had ~75% of the world's production capability in internal combustion engines. And quite properly concluded that that meant that going to war with America would be suicidal for Germany.

Too bad (for Hitler) that Hitler didn't read that sort of report.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

nobodyknowsimageek (218815) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950217)

I think you could make the case that the Allies won the war in large part due to superior cryptography. If the British (and later the US) had not been breaking the German and Japanese naval codes for most of the war, things might have turned out very differently.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

Smauler (915644) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950733)

What we've established that wins wars is US production - we didn't win WW2 with superior technology, we won it because we could do things like build a military up from "small" to "fricking huge" while still having enough production surplus to provide weapons/supplies/whatever to everyone else in the world.

Not to worry you with actual history, but if any one nation won WW2 it was the USSR.

Note that one of the most interesting bits of trivia about WW2 is that the USA, during the war, built more aircraft carriers than existed in the entire world before the war.

It's trivia because very few aircraft carriers had been built before WW2. They were not seen as important, incorrectly.

In the mid '30s, a German general, doing an analysis of mechanized warfare concepts noted that the USA had ~75% of the world's production capability in internal combustion engines. And quite properly concluded that that meant that going to war with America would be suicidal for Germany.

Too bad (for Hitler) that Hitler didn't read that sort of report.

Hitler did not initiate war with the US.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42951027)

Who built the only reliable supply trucks the Soviets have ever had and stocked them with food and ammunition? Aircraft flown across the Bering Straight from Alaska? The USSR provided the meat, but they would have needed a lot more than they had if they'd been on their own.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (2)

SillyHamster (538384) | about a year and a half ago | (#42951319)

Hitler did not initiate war with the US.

Hitler declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor.

Granted, it's not like the US was completely neutral up to that point, but changing it into open warfare was completely on him.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947657)

Oh great and powerful Korean People's Army Air Force, please have mercy on my electricity having soul! I knew not what I was terrorizing!

Indeed. Even this slashdot story is obviously a cover-up by the Western Powers. It is not radioactivity from their recent peaceful bomb test... it's simply the latent power emitted from the mind of the Great Leader.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947717)

Any radioactivity detected must have been from some dirty westerner farting.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

sheehaje (240093) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947659)

Don't worry, we are working on some advanced ballistics [dailymotion.com] capabilities of our own!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (4, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947739)

Maybe if our military leaders had hats that were as big as that guy's hat, we wouldn't be lagging so far behind North Korea in air superiority. And democracy. I mean, we don't even have "Democratic" in our country name!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

steelfood (895457) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948625)

And even though this is a country "of the people, for the people, and by the people" nowhere does "people" appear in "the United States of America."

I propose we change the name of this country to "the Democratic People's United States of America." Or better yet, to "the United Democratic People's States of America."

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

RDW (41497) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947741)

Catchy tune at the end too, that's a real earworm, I'll be whistling that one all the way to the firestorm they are going to unleash on me.

It's OK, but really not in the same league as Excellent Horse-Like Lady:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5tkXgw2OMY [youtube.com]

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947765)

Catchy tune at the end too, that's a real earworm, I'll be whistling that one all the way to the firestorm they are going to unleash on me.

It's OK, but really not in the same league as Excellent Horse-Like Lady:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5tkXgw2OMY [youtube.com]

Goddamn that made me wanna buy a loom and produce fabric for pennies on the dollar.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

foniksonik (573572) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950869)

Wow it's North Korean Laverne and Shirley. Amazing. Guess that makes the fearless leader "Squiggy". Quite apropos.

http://youtu.be/mRmKzxhMzwo [youtu.be]

And an episode with a horse in it:

http://youtu.be/-8_GSk2ptMo [youtu.be]

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

synapse7 (1075571) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947853)

Well, to be fair if they fly anywhere near a lightning storm the F-35s are screwed. [dailytech.com]

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947949)

Well, it's not quite that comical IRL, at least not according to Wiki. They have several hundred craft, mostly Chinese and a few dozen Soviet. At this point the Chinese might be willing to give us the "root password" but not say they did so publicly. We can handle the MiGs, we've done it before. Sidewinders from 50km and we won't even have to look at their ugly pusses At some point, China may very well reason that a united Korea is much less of a worry than the loose cannon that is the DPRK.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

PRMan (959735) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948019)

And well they should. A united Korea would buy twice as many Chinese parts as South Korea does currently.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

DuranDuran (252246) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949965)

False - you have absolutely no evidence that that's the case. DPRK is by and large poor and hungry. South Korea is the opposite.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

PPH (736903) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948765)

China may very well reason that a united Korea is much less of a worry than the loose cannon that is the DPRK.

I don't think China worries about that at all. What they do worry about is the flood of refugees into China during the 'reunification' process. Which is certain to be orders of magnitude worse than the collapse of the Warsaw Pact in Eastern Europe.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949167)

Couldn't they just employ a shitload of chinese to stand shoulder to shoulder as a literal great wall of china around NK until the reunification process completes? Added bonus: Target practice to prepare their army for the eventual world war they have a decent chance of winning :D

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948161)

They'd love you over at http://reddit.com/r/Pyongyang [reddit.com]

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948363)

Man, that's a big hat.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948461)

How can that stand up to the DPRK's 40 Chengdu F-7s?! And defending Pyongyang they have 40 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29s! 40 + 40 = 70 and 70 > 63!!!

Traditionally, we've always thought that 40+40 = 80.

Or were you using NK math?

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948693)

That's why they need long range nukes. The US has the most powerful conventional military in the world and they know they couldn't win if an invasion came, so the only solution is mutually assured nuclear annihilation. Well, the US would survive, but probably won't risk millions of deaths and contamination. Probably.

This is what happens when you label a country part of an "axis of evil", play war games off its shores and go around invading other countries you don't like.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948745)

That's why they need long range nukes. The US has the most powerful conventional military in the world and they know they couldn't win if an invasion came, so the only solution is mutually assured nuclear annihilation. Well, the US would survive, but probably won't risk millions of deaths and contamination. Probably.

This is what happens when you label a country part of an "axis of evil", play war games off its shores and go around invading other countries you don't like.

LOLOLOLOL yep, this is entirely the US's fault and we should be glad these bat shit insane dictators have nuclear weapons. Jesus fucking christ, where did you come from? 4chan?

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

gtall (79522) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949509)

Never read much history about N. Korea have you.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948839)

Even worse, when you do the correct math, 40 + 40 = 80, and 80 is even >er than 63!

WE ARE SCREWED!!!!!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

PPH (736903) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948851)

They'll scramble any time now. Just as soon as those spare parts for their MiGs arrive. Currently back-ordered with the Soviet Union.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948871)

That indicates that the test was well sealed deep underground

At least they think about our safety when obliterating some of our collective asses into ash. I knew the Pyongyang only has our safety in mind! For the children of the Party, etcetera etcetera!

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948971)

I am 100% certain Kim is quaking in his boots at the comments of masturbatory teens posting on Slashdot from mom's basement

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949071)

The Afghanis did it with bent, rusty rifles.

Lord help you guys up against somebody with >= 16th century tech.

Re:Retrieved Samples Without DPRK's AF Scrambling? (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year and a half ago | (#42951349)

You are being funny but the sad fact is the F-35 is yet another techno turkey like the F-22, and it'll spend more time on the ground than it will in the air. It also is so damned expensive we'll never be able to afford to replace our aging fleets with these super expensive techno turkeys so we really are gonna be at a disadvantage when you can flyaway a SU27 for less than 40 mil and a MiG29 for less than 60 mil.

We need to kill the techno turkeys, kill the Ford carrier or at the very least make it the last one we build for a couple decades (we have 11 the next largest possible threat country has ZERO so its beyond overkill and into total fucking waste by now) and as the Israelis have shown the F-Teen series are still seriously ass kicking planes and you can buy several F-15s or F-16s for the price of just one techno turkey Hell if you want Stealth they already have plans for a Stealth Eagle that will lower the radar footprint by something like 80% while still having longer range and better firepower than an F-35.

We are making the same mistakes the Germans made in WWII, expecting a handful of "super planes" to do ALL the work and as the Germans found out what you get IRL is planes that spend more time being worked on than they do in the air and the cost makes losing even one plane seriously hurt. Its obvious to anybody with a brain that any future wars with technologically equal enemys will be facing off against Russian and Chinese planes and their much lower costs mean they can spam us out of the sky. When you figure in the fact that the Chinese have developed sea skimmer missiles that can turn a carrier group into scrap without ever getting into range of the F-35 its pretty obvious are current plans only enrich the defense contractors, they don't do shit about keeping our Air Force flying.

Cancel the F-35, build teen series, check into how much it would cost to build more Warthogs as we have seen those are worth their weight in gold against terrorist enemies, and then you'll have a plan that will carry America into the future. If we ever face off against anybody but goat herders we are gonna end up in serious trouble, we have bet the farm on techno turkeys that have yet to show they are anything but money pits.

Xenon Released? (3, Funny)

Y-Crate (540566) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947481)

This means we can finally get new Mac Pros!

An improvement from 90's (1)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947581)

When they had their accident above ground.

I know what the bomb was made with (2)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947585)

Isn't it obvious? The NKoreans are all over THIS WEBSITE buying as much Uranium as they can! [amazon.com]

Re:I know what the bomb was made with (1)

nitehawk214 (222219) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947731)

Customers Who Viewed This Item Also Viewed

The 2009-2014 Outlook for Wood Toilet Seats in Greater China
Looking For-Best of David Hasselhoff

I am now concerned.

Re:I know what the bomb was made with (1)

nitehawk214 (222219) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947757)

Good reviews for the Toilet Seat [amazon.com] book as well.

Actually, "Better than Twilight" may not be a compliment.

Re:I know what the bomb was made with (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947889)

I just worry about what evil they plan to do with that Tuscan Whole Milk

And Fresh Whole Rabbit (1)

Dast (10275) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947993)

http://www.amazon.com/Cloverdale-Fresh-Whole-Rabbit/dp/B00012182G/ref=pd_sbs_indust_3

I guess that's better than rotten half rabbit.

Nuke North Korea! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947629)

Real quick-like, the whole country. Of course the other countries will be shocked, but we just say "come on, you know you wanted to, and we saved you the cost of doing it" and they will all have to agree.

Problem solved!

Re:Nuke North Korea! (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947785)

Are we sure someone DIDN'T already nuke North Korea? From everything I've seen or heard about that country, you'd be better off living in the Fallout universe than North Korea.

Re:Nuke North Korea! (1, Troll)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947907)

China and Russia will not agree. Also innocent people... asshat.

Re:Nuke North Korea! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947961)

There are innocent people in North Korea?? wtf?? They PK me all the time in every MMO I've ever played.... :-/

Re:Nuke North Korea! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948631)

Do you have a UPS tracking number for your sense of humor shipment yet? You're going to keep missing these until it arrives.

Rice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947721)

Well I detected the smell of fried rice coming from North Korea! I wonder what they're up to?!?!

WTF is up with the flag? (4, Funny)

the_humeister (922869) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947875)

A story about North Korea and you guys put a Japanese flag up?

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (1)

tgd (2822) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948009)

A story about North Korea and you guys put a Japanese flag up?

The summary did mention Japan, and if a Slashdot editor actually read a summary, we should be positive and encourage him or her, not fault the missing of the whole point of it. We need to reward improved behavior.

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (1)

DFurno2003 (739807) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948039)

Eh, same time zone...

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (1, Insightful)

PRMan (959735) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948049)

<American>
Aren't they all the same? I mean, I can't tell them apart...
</American>

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948621)

Of course they're the same, they're both Chinese.

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (2)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948385)

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Hell no, and it's not over now!

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948437)

Japan is rightfully part of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's World. Dear Leader allows them to think they're independent, that's all.

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (1)

steelfood (895457) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948657)

It's possible the slashdot editors believe the Korean peninsula to still be a part of the Japanese Empire.

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (1)

medv4380 (1604309) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948763)

You mean it's not? They'll have to fix that.

Re:WTF is up with the flag? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949633)

The 1940's called. Imperial Japan wants their invasion back.

Faint traces detected ... well sealed ... (1)

Kittenman (971447) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947877)

If a 'well sealed' nuclear test releases 'faint traces', let's be thankful that it wasn't a 'badly sealed' one. I mean, wouldn't a 'well sealed' one mean no traces at all?

Re:Faint traces detected ... well sealed ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947901)

I think the whole country of N. Korea should be so well sealed that they run out of oxygen....

Wait, didn't this almost happen to Springfield?? Okay, don't have a screw cap on the top of their dome and lower a bomb into their midst... Just leave the dome there...

Re:Faint traces detected ... well sealed ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948123)

Yes, because murdering 25M citizens who are fed government propaganda like it's food and food like it's the middle ages is a fair way of dealing with the hundred or so party members who are keeping them under foot.

Re:Faint traces detected ... well sealed ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948523)

Figure out how to kill one group without killing the other, cause those 100 must be some serious job creators, wouldn't make sense to kill those ones that's for sure!

Re:Faint traces detected ... well sealed ... (1)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949657)

There's a lot of evidence that people in the middle ages ate far better than the people of the DPRK. We have several bookshelves of medieval recipes and documentation to that effect. (Research-heavy SCA household)

Not How Nuclear Stuff Works (2)

Iskender (1040286) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948279)

If a 'well sealed' nuclear test releases 'faint traces', let's be thankful that it wasn't a 'badly sealed' one. I mean, wouldn't a 'well sealed' one mean no traces at all?

This is not the case, and the reason likely is that we're dealing with nuclear instead of chemical measurements.

IANA chemist or physicist, but from what I understand it's like this: while we can do pretty damn accurate measurements of chemicals, it's nothing compared to how well we can measure radioactive isotopes. They emit radiation by definition and therefore broadcast their presence. What's more, some specific radiation signatures only appear after nuclear tests.

Basically, there is an absurd amount of atoms all around us, and all of them get into everything. When you get close to the level of measuring single atoms you see the truth: there isn't really any such thing as "sealed" (if there are actual experts here you should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

Why is this important data? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42947887)

For those interested, the reason security forces are trying to determine the content of the gas is that everyone is very interested in whether U or Pu was used to construct the bomb. If U was used, it is possible that they are receiving the materials and/or know-how from Iran, and that Iran may be using NK as a proxy for testing in exchange for food/tech items which Iran can purchase using gold through Turkey to get around sanctions.

Re:Why is this important data? (2)

rasmusbr (2186518) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948863)

This may be a stupid question, but how do we know that North Korea didn't simply drill a hole, say 1000 meters deep, fill it with 7,000 thousand tonnes of chemical explosives and a liberal amount of electric detonators and blow that up to make it look like they have nukes?

Re:Why is this important data? (1)

rasmusbr (2186518) | about a year and a half ago | (#42950191)

That should be 7,000 tonnes, not 7,000,000.

I believe the latest test was estimated at close to 7 kilotons, which should be totally possible to do with chemical explosives.

Blight rights (1)

Carnivore24 (467239) | about a year and a half ago | (#42947921)

Kim Jong Un is growing!

Re:Blight rights (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949471)

By the looks of it, he's growing outwards, not upwards.

Quibble about last sentence of TFS (1)

idontgno (624372) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948011)

From TFS:

...the gas likely seeped from North Korea's test site on 15 February, three days after the original test. That indicates that the test was well sealed deep underground."

My quibble is with the word I highligted: "well sealed". The Nature article (TFA #1) puts it like this:

The delay between the test and detection of the radioisotopes is likely to indicate that the nuclear weapon was well-buried deep underground....

The original German announcement (TFA 3) is... well, it's in German. But the equivalent of "well-sealed" or "well-buried" is "gut 'contained'":

...dass der Test sehr gut "contained" wurde, also nur eine sehr geringe Menge an Radionukliden ausgetreten ist.

Yeah. The English word "contained", in quotes. So maybe TFS could have used "well-contained"?

"Well-sealed" is gratuitously non-literal. "Sealed" is an absolute. Either something is sealed or it isn't. "Poorly sealed" is a needlessly verbose synonym for "unsealed". "Well sealed" but "leaked radiation" just hurts my head.

"Well-buried" is a fair description. Very literal, and doesn't carry any paradoxical implications.

And. C'mon, folks. The Austrians actually used the word "contained". It's a good word. It must be, if someone's going to borrow it from English for what is otherwise all German. It's an appropriate word. "Containment" never implies absoluteness, so it is everything "Sealed" isn't.

Executive summary: Submitter makes poor word choices in paraphrasing multiple sources which made perfectly good word choices, and damages the credibility of TFS in the process. ("Well sealed but leaky. Riiiiight.") And Slashdot editing is... Slashdot editing.

Re:Quibble about last sentence of TFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948311)

Just to nit, sealed is not binary. The olden Roman times lead to three terms related to this*. Open, sealed and Hermetically sealed. At the time, it was believed that only a priest of Hermes could seal something so perfectly that there was no contamination with the outside world.

*from my brief understanding of the Greek dominance that preceeded this, there were around 45 terms having to do with the state and quality and timing of something potentially having had been sealed eventually

Re:Quibble about last sentence of TFS (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948529)

OK you two, knock it off. This is Slashdot, not the Oxford English Dictionary forums.

Have some sympathy for the rest of us illiterate slobs.

Re:Quibble about last sentence of TFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949457)

Hey, I _am_ an illiterate slob, you inconsiderate clod.

Re:Quibble about last sentence of TFS (1)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949693)

Have some sympathy for the rest of us illiterate slobs.

No.

Never underestimate crazy (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948227)

It's hard telling what NK will do but when you are that small, have little left to loose and a couple axes to grind, extreme becomes an inviting option. Especially if you've evolved in a bubble of your own manufactured reality. It might be funny to see them puff-up about their "military might" but we underestimated them once before and it didn't go well. In fact it REALLY didn't go well - for 15 years.

Re:Never underestimate crazy (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year and a half ago | (#42948921)

but we underestimated them once before and it didn't go well. In fact it REALLY didn't go well - for 15 years.

Which 15 years are you talking about?

1950-1953, perhaps? During the Korean War (note that we annihilated the NK Army in the first year of that war, then spent the rest of the war fighting the PLA)?

In any case, that's only four years. Where are the other eleven?

Re:Never underestimate crazy (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949147)

In any case, that's only four years. Where are the other eleven?

Sorry, typo on my part. You're correct. I was thinking about Vietnam but typing about Korean. I'll show myself the door...

Re:Never underestimate crazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42950031)

No it went well until we got to China's front door and were told to stop.Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]

Other possibilities (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42948599)

It could well be that they had (or produced) the Xenon 133 that they leaked so that everyone would think they had a nuclear detonation rather than just an earthquake.

What I don't get is how all this happened. Didn't we tell NK that we wouldn't "tolerate" them having nuclear weapons?

Was our leadership just talking out of its ass, or is there intent to do something?

Is all our bluster anything more than the threat? Is our government saying, "STOP, or I'll say 'stop' again"? Our leadership needs to make good on their so-far empty threats. NK wants nukes SO bad, maybe we should just give them some. We can save money on the deliver too, by simply dropping them from passing aircraft, or using the built-in delivery rocket systems.

Seriously though, the idea that we don't want to fight a country because our bone of contention is with their government, and the people have no real control, isn't working. Their people support the government because they don't know any better, they must. We could try to educate them, except we'd have to invade or infiltrate to do it, which of course we can't do because for one thing, China is right there, and we've been stupidly funding their rise to power for the last couple dozen years. China wants NK to exist as a border between it and SK, but why? They have more in common with SK than maybe they want to admit. WTF?

We may simply have to blow NK off the face of the earth as a warning to anyone else, and to halt their program, but our government doesn't have the balls to do something like that, so I guess we'll just make more empty threats until they (inevitably) achieve the capability of threatening our friends in the region, global stability and security, or US. THEN we'll do something. The sad thing is that we don't do something BEFORE they go and kill a bunch of innocents somewhere like Japan, for example.

They flew a missile OVER Japan a few years back, which means they can hit Japan, and they have, it would seem, the ability to produce nukes. What happens when they say, "give us food or we're going to nuke Tokyo"?

Their people starve because they have to feed their military that they keep built-up against the threat of what? Invasion by the South? What are they afraid of, prosperity? NO! Not prosperity! We don't want to be able to feed ourselves, NO!

The longer other countries provide humanitarian relief for them, the longer they can prop up their failed, stupid, backward economic system (if you can call it that,) that only promotes mass-suffering, and for what? To prove Communism can work? It doesn't and can't, and it's been demonstrated again and again that the ideal of share-and-share-alike, lovely as it is, doesn't scale, and command-directed production is inherently inefficient, so much so that that country doesn't seem to be able to feed itself.

It's time to put up, or shut up. We need to do something about their government, or be prepared to watch the increasingly heavily armed thug in the region terrorize their neighbors and others around the world.

Re:Other possibilities (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42949393)

Considering the amount of artillery that can hit Seoul within 15 minutes, if we are going to do something, that something is going to happen very very suddenly.

Like the entire DMZ going BOOM all at once, every single piece of hardware and every little hidey hole blown to smithereens. That will be the only way to hit NK militarily, you can't have a big build up to war, it has to happen suddenly and decisively. We have a president who is familiar with said tactic.

I still am not sure I'm convinced (4, Interesting)

argStyopa (232550) | about a year and a half ago | (#42949001)

I'm not sure I'm convinced that DPRK even HAS nukes.
0) the Ryongchon disaster - a truly enormous conventional explosion of mysterious origin, variously assigned 'colliding trains with LNG', 'train of ammonium nitrate', and other really explosive stuff suggests that DPRK could have been shipping colossal amounts of explosives for years.

1) the 2006 nuke test was rated at 1 kt, and 'some' radioactivity was detected. Pretty much sounds like a great pile of explosives interleaved with old Fiestaware dishes would give about the same result.

2) the 2009 test was likewise not much more than a fizzle, nuclearly-speaking, rated at 2-4 kt. Still well within the range of "giant frikkin' minecraft-style pile of explosives".

3) the 2013 test has now been estimated at 5kt. Huge, yes, but still doable. (One 50-car train of explosives = 5kt explosives. The DPRK could easily assemble 50 boxcars of explosives over 4 years.)

(tinfoil hat/)
4) it fits the narrative; with AlQaeda a pathetic rump of an organization reduced to bombing girls schools in remote Afghani provinces, we need an "enemy" to justify ongoing defense spending and 'alertness'.

(/tinfoil hat)

Re:I still am not sure I'm convinced (1)

zenlessyank (748553) | about a year and a half ago | (#42951311)

You might want to pack on up and third world yourself up proper and find a good proxy. Our govt and society does not like it when one of their citizens sees through the Fog of Shit, as you have the ability to do it seems. It is nice to see that not EVERYONE'S eyes are fogged over. Kinda smells like the same shit I was fed as a kid that the USSR was our mortal enemy, yet we had just fought TOGETHER in WW2 and kidnapped top german scientists and co-developed nukes to keep our populations in fear as to bleed out our savings for CAPITALISM AND COMMUNISM. In the name of the COLD WAR. or Iraq was a friendly base we used to bargain with the Iranians for some 52 hostages they took. Then we fight a 10 year war with them. Never fight the Iranians who supposedly took said hostages. And yet, I have met russians, north koreans, Iranians, Iraqis, and BY FAR ,we americans are the worst assholes ever!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>