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!

US Gov't Blocks Sales To Russian Supercomputer Maker

timothy posted about a year ago | from the all-knowing-state dept.

United States 116

Nerval's Lobster writes "T-Platforms, which manufactured the fastest supercomputer in Russia (and twenty-sixth fastest in the world), has been placed on the IT equivalent of the no-fly list. In March, the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security added T-Platforms' businesses in Germany, Russia and Taiwan to the 'Entity List,' which includes those believed to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. U.S. IT companies are essentially banned from doing business with T-Platforms, especially with regards to HPC hardware such as microprocessors, which could be used for what the government views as illegal purposes. The rule, discovered by HPCWire, was published in March. According to the rule, Commerce's End-User Review Committee (ERC) believes that T-Platforms may be assisting the Russian government and military conduct nuclear research — which, given historical tensions between the two countries, apparently falls outside the bounds of permitted use. An email address that T-Platforms listed for its German office bounced, and Slashdot was unable to reach executives at its Russian headquarters for comment."

cancel ×

116 comments

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

US vs. Russia & China (3, Insightful)

drinkydoh (2658743) | about a year ago | (#43423829)

These artificial limitations on what and with who US companies can work with are just creating a wall between US and other countries. The nations that mainly benefit from this are Russia and China and they can do a lot of business and even military research together. Not only that but Russia and China have always been good friends, even after soviet russia fell down.

Therefore, both Russia and China wins and US loses.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

ButtonMashingGorilla (2880531) | about a year ago | (#43423919)

Not only that but Russia and China have always been good friends, even after soviet russia fell down.

Friends with whom? With each other I will agree to; There is considerable tension in the past between the US and the USSR, as well as the current issues between the US and China and the US and Soviet Union.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43425773)

Except that Russia has changed a whole lot since the Soviet Union disintegrated, but for the US bureaucrats, nothing happened. Hence, in their foreign policy analysis, Russia is still considered an enemy, which is why you see moronic Western support to Chechnya, Bosnia, Kosovo and anything that's anti-Slavic.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | about a year ago | (#43425919)

The comment read to me that Russia and China are friends, not that the US and China/Russia are friends,

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423991)

...Russia and China have always been good friends, even after soviet russia fell down.

I guess you never heard of the Sino-Soviet Split then? Other than that, I agree with you. The US is only harming itself by alienating Russia and China. They will now have more incentive to work together, and with the amount of money their economies are pulling in it will only be a matter of time before they overtake the West.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1, Redundant)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#43424005)

These artificial limitations on what and with who US companies can work with are just creating a wall between US and other countries. The nations that mainly benefit from this are Russia and China and they can do a lot of business and even military research together. Not only that but Russia and China have always been good friends, even after soviet russia fell down.

Therefore, both Russia and China wins and US loses.

It's time to stop pretending all this is going to work. If anyone in the world wants software or hardware it's pretty easy to get it.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (3, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year ago | (#43424187)

It's time to stop pretending all this is going to work. If anyone in the world wants software or hardware it's pretty easy to get it.

It works as well as expected. It slows things down but doesn't pretend stop the flow of information completely. Nobody except the black and white brigade thinks otherwise. Slowing your enemy down is a useful strategic goal. And, in this case, Russia and China are enemies in the great game.

And lots of things aren't 'easy' to get. You might get the part. You won't get much support. And in complex tech, support is often a deal breaker.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

stanlyb (1839382) | about a year ago | (#43424431)

Only if having a local dedicated support team is expensive. And guess what, it is true only in US.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2)

TheCarp (96830) | about a year ago | (#43425691)

Sure sure, but does this really apply as well to your frenemies?

Lets be serious, there is no real concern with the USSR having a nuclear program. If there is any country in the entire world where we have less interest in interfereing with their nuclear program, I don't know who it is. To call this a day late and a dollar short is being generous.

So whats the REAL issue? Because this sort of pissing back and forth tends to be over far more petty and mundane issues than pretending to be actual enemies.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

flayzernax (1060680) | about a year ago | (#43424401)

The U.S. isn't necessarily trying to stop other parts of the world (South Africa) from buying supercomputers from Russia. They are worried that banks or other infrastructure in the U.S. will buy computers that could easily be compromised by many back doors. I don't think this is going to work out well anyway.

If anything requires that much security, thats one heck of a complex project that I don't even know if it could be successfully implemented without going to "dangerous, un-audited" sources of labor, parts or resources.

Maybe this is just a symptom of the U.S. becoming paranoid in general of the world. Slippery slope stuff. N.K. has lots of rules like this, but for every day things.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

mutantSushi (950662) | about a year ago | (#43428205)

This is about supercomputers used for scientific modelling, not servers for banks or infrastructure.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#43428229)

This is about supercomputers used for scientific modelling, not servers for banks or infrastructure.

Which are supercomputers of another sort, but supercomputers nonetheless.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

flayzernax (1060680) | about a year ago | (#43428807)

In which case we'd be really shooting our scientists in the foot by limiting their options severely. Well I guess maybe not that bad considering SRI international is now in charge of operations over at Arecibo and they are maybe a bit less affected by this. But there are still plenty of smaller universities, schools, and corporations that could use scientific computing on the cheep. (yes they need small "supercomputers" to do digital analysis on the insane amounts of data that is collected). This should be mostly unaffected by the industrial espionage and spy shit the bigger governments are pulling. Then again are the Chinese and Russians so mad at us that they would literally mess with astrophysics research...

I could see the government getting involved if it was DARPA project money. But that should be in the guidelines of the project, not a blanket rule for all in the country to follow and many larger projects are no longer secret and open for anyone or sold to companies like SRI. Keep secret and non-secret systems separate. But it seems like now-a-days they want secrecy everywhere so they expect Universities to require security clearance now and have certified computer networks. Kinda dumb ;p It should be departmental, and universities should be asking for time on the governments certified hardware, not the other way around. That is if the gov is concerned about security for important mission critical war fighting computing resources.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (5, Interesting)

poity (465672) | about a year ago | (#43424597)

You're making the assumption that the US's plan rests entirely in closing the "open market" gate. Of course it won't stop unwanted tech transfer, so of course it can't be the whole plan, because there will always be black markets and back channels. However, those routes are places where intelligence agencies thrive, and by limiting the avenues of sale, the US makes it more likely that the Russian company or their proxies stumble across CIA-compromised suppliers. It doesn't stop a determined buyer, but it will make that buyer think twice, use more diligence, and generally expend more time, effort and resources to avoid falling into such traps, which, given enough of these speed bumps, will make their project increasingly cost-prohibitive. That's what I think they're doing -- they know they can't stop it, so making Russia pay out the ass to accomplish their goal is the next best option.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#43427563)

Back in the '80s IBM was prohibited from selling computers to the USSR by the US government. They built a factory in Tacna, Peru, and that subsidiary merrily sold the Soviets all the computers they could come up with cash for.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (4, Informative)

Minter92 (148860) | about a year ago | (#43424027)

Not only that but Russia and China have always been good friends, even after soviet russia fell down.

Actually this statement is inaccurate. Russia and China have been antagonistic toward each other through most of the past. There was a short period of cooperation after the Chinese civil war but that quickly turned sour as the two countries differed in their approaches to communism. Relations only began to improve after the fall of the USSR

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424043)

The USSR and China were not always good friends. Research Eisenhower's foreign policy and the difference between urban industrial focused communism and rural agrarian focused communism.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

Dr.Bykoff (2882955) | about a year ago | (#43425743)

USSR wasn't "communist" country - it's a Western media myth

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43425779)

No True Scotsman....

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2)

JackieBrown (987087) | about a year ago | (#43425993)

You can use that argument against any economic system that you want to justify that failed.

They referred to themselves as communist - western media did not start that label.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union [wikipedia.org]

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43426747)

They called their party communist, but they never claimed to be already a communist country, they claimed that the USSR was a socialist country under the rule of the one and only party, which was considered to be a required step to become a communist country.

Great wall of USA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424115)

Only this time it's a wall for commerce :P ... this would be brilliant, USA has to learn fair trade the hard way, now you can be your own bitch USA.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424571)

These artificial limitations on what and with who US companies can work with are just creating a wall between US and other countries.

At least we (the US) can manage to build a wall somewhere.....

Re:US vs. Russia & China (4, Informative)

hjf (703092) | about a year ago | (#43424771)

Argentina tried to buy 5 nVidia TESLA units. We bought 4 and when we ordered the 5th (a public university here in Argentina) the US export controls kicked in. They had to send someone to the US to explain why they wanted "so much computing power".

We were developing a UHD 3D video codec.

(We as in Argentina. I have no participation in that).

Argentina is not China, Russia, and has never been an enemy, or at war, with USA.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | about a year ago | (#43425425)

The US provided material support to the UK in the Falklands War and promised manpower if the UK lost an aircraft carrier. Which is just about as close to "enemy" as you get.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

hjf (703092) | about a year ago | (#43426931)

The US has decided to remain neutral in the Malvinas affair in the past few years. Which is just about as close to an "ally" as we can get.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | about a year ago | (#43427395)

Sure, but the claim wasn't "isn't an enemy now" it was "has never been an enemy".

Re:US vs. Russia & China (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43425457)

No, but the US is at war with the whole world until it has full control over global economics.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43425463)

>Argentina is not China, Russia, and has never been an enemy, or at war, with USA.

The USA has always been at war with Argentina.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2)

cusco (717999) | about a year ago | (#43427597)

Argentina doesn't cooperate nicely with the New York bankers any more. They're paying off loans early, not selling of their infrastructure for pennies on the dollar, and generally acting like they're more concerned for the benefit of their own citizens rather than the mega-corporations. In Washington DC that's seen as 'hostile' actions.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about a year ago | (#43430405)

Would those loans that they are supposedly paying back early be the same ones they have defaulted on and are refusing to pay? Those same outstanding loans that are forcing the government to send public owned ships and aircraft to known safe way points and then having to lease third party aircraft to complete the journeys, just incase creditors have the presidents aircraft repossessed?

Re:US vs. Russia & China (2)

TsuruchiBrian (2731979) | about a year ago | (#43426301)

These artificial limitations on what and with who US companies can work with are just creating a wall between US and other countries.

The wall is full of holes. Companies can still sell equipment to a middleman that then resells to Russia. Even if this is forbidden, it is completely unenforceable if the middleman is not a US company.

Re:US vs. Russia & China (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43428445)

Russia and China have always been good friends...
you're a fuckin dope.
and so are the dopes who mod up pure stupidity.

BLOCK THE SALE !! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423853)

Just let China/Taiwan sell it to them !!

Well, of course! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423875)

Slashdot was unable to reach executives at its Russian headquarters for comment."

Executive's secretary: "Sir, Slashdot wants to talk to you."

Russian Executive: *rolling eyes* "That's OK. No need to respond I know what they're going say. 'In Soviet Russia Super Computers you!'"

Re:Well, of course! (3, Funny)

gtirloni (1531285) | about a year ago | (#43427917)

Who cares about Russian supercomputers. I think Slashdot attempting to check the facts is the big news here.

Re:Well, of course! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43429119)

Beautiful!

Hi, this is Timothy from Slashdot... (5, Funny)

Overzeetop (214511) | about a year ago | (#43423893)

Hi, this is Timothy from Slashdot, I'd like to speak to...

*click*

I find it very amusing to think of Timothy calling up a company in Russia for comment on why they just got blacklisted by the US Gov't. I'm not sure why, though it could be because every time I see his name on the editor line I think of the monkey from ThinkGeek.

Re:Hi, this is Timothy from Slashdot... (1)

who_stole_my_kidneys (1956012) | about a year ago | (#43424281)

Any one that would use Slashdot in their greeting would be hung up on. "Oh Slashdot, that website with all those shit disturbers...we will get back to you on that."

Re:Hi, this is Timothy from Slashdot... (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#43424619)

I find it very amusing to think of Timothy calling up a company in Russia for comment on why they just got blacklisted by the US Gov't.

I guess you've never tried. I talked to the US Department of Treasury once as a member of the press merely by being a volunteer for a not for profit prediction market which in case you're wondering is a lot less authoritative a position than being a Slashdot editor (though better than a drunk in bar). Some will talk to you. Some won't. All it takes is a telephone call or email to find out.

Re:Hi, this is Timothy from Slashdot... (0)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#43424713)

(On the second attempt, Timothy calls again using a blatantly falsetto voice)

Timothy: Hi, this is Dawn Kawamoto [slashdot.org] from Dice. I'd like to speak to...
Russian: Did you just call five minutes ago pretending [slashdot.org] to be from Slashdot [slashdot.org] ?
Timothy: Maybe... it's hard to keep track these days.
Russian: *click*

In Soviet Russia, Slashdot editor pretend to be Dice news editor

Re:Hi, this is Timothy from Slashdot... (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43424929)

the email bounced. that's the equivalent of them not wanting any contacts in a method they themselves advertise to be contacted at. are they in business even? and if they are why wouldn't they spin the business to another company name to buy cpu's..

and companies respond to reporters from far shadier web pages than slashdot(i'd be willing to bet money on that 70% of the upper tier of people in the company know about slashdot anyways).

As if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423905)

As if any HPC silicon is actually manufactured in the US today.

Re:As if... (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about a year ago | (#43424077)

Actually, we do. BUT, it is duplicated in places like China, and as long as China is allowed to manipulate their money and defy all of the WTO and USA-China treaty, then it will continue to be duplicated or moved to China.

friends...enemies.....wtf? (2, Insightful)

stanlyb (1839382) | about a year ago | (#43423915)

If it is to use russian space station, they are good enough to be friends, but if it is to actually lend them some computer power, they become enemy!!! No, really, what the heck!
And, just for the record, i don't see how this ban would stop them to buy the parts directly from the manufacturer, China.

Re:friends...enemies.....wtf? (4, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year ago | (#43424241)

Have you ever stopped to consider that human relationships are complicated? People write books about this sort of thing. Plays and movies even. Tears are shed, bottles of booze drank and broken. Wars started. Wars ended.

I mean, people Tweet about this stuff!

Re:friends...enemies.....wtf? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43425355)

But the Chinese don't like Vodka! lol

You think the geeks here know anything about human relations or politics? Look around, they probably don't even know that in the 1930's U.S. Republicans aligned against Hitler, with the U.S. Commies, and the same "doggedly uncompromising" Republicans then villified their temporary friends in the 50's, when McCarthy decided that it benefitted their new, uncompromising politics. (By the way I just found out that 3 of the U.S. military leaders charged with violently removing the "Bonus Army" from Washington D.C., when the Hoover refused to pay the WWI vets their legally due bonus, were Patton, MacArthur and Eisenhower.)

It's not just in the mideast that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Right, all those Chinese CPU makers (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about a year ago | (#43424485)

I mean there's Intel.. wait, no, they fab their stuff almost entirely in the US, though also some in Israel. Ok well those bastards at AMD... wait, no, they use Globalfoundries who is in Germany, the US, and Singapore (the NY plant being where the new stuff comes from). Ok well IBM surely those cheap... wait, no, they are in the US as well for fabrication (NY and NJ).

So, ummm, precisely which US chip maker do you think has their stuff in China? Because I don't know of one.

Re:Right, all those Chinese CPU makers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424543)

Why would it matter when the Chinese can manufacture an equal chip if they want to?

Re:Right, all those Chinese CPU makers (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#43424701)

you have proof they can? they have a MIPs architecture chip they are perfecting but I haven't heard any done with features below 65nm

Re:Right, all those Chinese CPU makers (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43424977)

it doesn't matter where they fab them. it matters that the company does business in USA - germany isn't in USA, but amd can't waive their american business.

welcome to business bullying 101 and why someone would want a supercomputer built out of chinese mips cpu's...

Re:friends...enemies.....wtf? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43429007)

What's more it's a Russian company and Russia has ratified the non-proliferation treaty. When I read the news I was thinking about T-Platforms selling somebody under UN embargo, like Iran or North Korea.

if it looks like a shell company, and acts... (1)

swschrad (312009) | about a year ago | (#43423937)

gotcha, caught 'ya, General Ivan

US vs. Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423957)

Gimme a break. We won, they lost, you know? It's been in a couple of the papers.

Re:US vs. Russia (5, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | about a year ago | (#43424061)

Sometimes, those who lose, will come back to defeat you. Ask Europe how that works out.

Re:US vs. Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43425447)

But we won... then we sent our bankers to Versaille after WWI, then we "rebuilt" Europe after WWII.

What could possibly go wrong now?

This is getting a little out of hand. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423965)

No, not the listees. The lists. That is, the USoA government.

Yes, the parallels with the TSA's no-fly-lists are apt. The bullying is entirely comparable, too.

No problems (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43423967)

No problems, China can just manufacture any kind of electronics component the Russians are interested in buying, and then deny sales of the same components to the US citing the same reasons. Now the rest of the world can trade and grow together while the US can isolate itself and sit in the Atlantic being as superior as it wants.

Hi, welcome to Toys 'R Us! May I help you? (5, Funny)

RevWaldo (1186281) | about a year ago | (#43423979)

Da, may I have 10,000 PS4s please?

.

Re:Hi, welcome to Toys 'R Us! May I help you? (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#43424365)

PS4s aren't going to be like PS3s with their super-fancy specialized processors that intrigued some super-computer builders--those gave the developers fits. While it's not going to use a PC architecture, you're not going to see any technology in it that you can't get in a high-end PC with high-powered graphic cards. For non-gaming purposes, you might as well just buy PCs; they'll be easier to configure and use for non-gaming purposes.

Re:Hi, welcome to Toys 'R Us! May I help you? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43426321)

While it's not going to use a PC architecture, you're not going to see any technology in it that you can't get in a high-end PC with high-powered graphic cards.

I think that was GP's point. The US has (apparently) said that you can't export high-end PC processors to Russia, so the obvious work-around is to buy toys that have PC-caliber processing power

LOL; does not matter (3, Interesting)

WindBourne (631190) | about a year ago | (#43424047)

Our executives have been offshoring all of our technology. As such, all we did was move this company over to China who using our technology, some stolen, but far too much was given. Just for a few dollars.

Re:LOL; does not matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43425647)

It's OK... there will be sequel. "Just for a few More Dollars," followed by, "I'm Yuaning All the Way to the Bank."

Dear US Govt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424075)

Sometimes it is necessary to remain vulnerable and trusting in order to not be a paranoid asshole... Supercomputers and other potentially useful stuff made outside of the US is scary? the US govt needs to understand that it is not the centre of the fucking world.

Re:Dear US Govt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424253)

There's a difference between "trusting" and "selling nuclear weapon design materiel"

Re:Dear US Govt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424337)

... not the centre of the fucking world.

Why do you hate Uranus so much!? Americans/Uranusians are from Uranus, don't hate Uranus! Love Uranus!

Please?

Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424079)

This is fairly common knowledge in the electronics industry, that anything that can be used in nuclear weapon R&D is export controlled and taken very seriously by the Commerce department. I work for a company that makes extremely fast oscilloscopes. We can't sell anything without an export license that can acquire data faster than a certain sample rate to Russia, Isreal, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, and several other countries due to nuclear non-proliferation. This is a separate restriction from ITAR, which bans anything related to weapons R&D from export without a license. This doesn't mean that you can't export these things, just that you need approval to do it. Much of Europe and countries who are friendly with the US have similar legal constraints.

Re:Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (1)

sinuscavity (2886369) | about a year ago | (#43424183)

And this constraint is used to undermine the industries and national security capabilities of other countries.

Re:Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (1)

Bacon Bits (926911) | about a year ago | (#43426253)

So? Don't like it? Build it yourself. I don't see anything stopping you from doing that.

Re:Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (1)

ogdenk (712300) | about a year ago | (#43428131)

When's the last time a US company actually built a US product in the US with US workers?

This is a pissing contest, plain and simple. If Russia wanted to nuke us, we'd be dead already. I'm pretty sure any CPU made in the last 15 years in sufficient quantities would make a decent supercomputing platform for nuclear research.

This is a move to prevent competition.

I'm sure the Chinese will help them out. They have that little MIPS clone they're fond of.

Re:Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (1)

Bacon Bits (926911) | about a year ago | (#43428233)

When's the last time a US company actually built a US product in the US with US workers?

Don't like it? Make us do it without your country's help. Who said it was a one-way street?

Re:Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43429177)

Come to think of it, perhaps preventing Russia from gaining simulation capabilities leads to walkout and an ending during the next test ban talks, which gives the US a reason to commence testing of their own. Surely the latest generation of nucular weapons would like little testing done to them before the release, if you know what I mean.

Re:Anything related to Nuke research is controlled (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424593)

Prohibiting sales of COTS gear that can be assembled into a respectable HPC system is a fool's errand of course. OTOH, real supercomputers with highly integrated components from Cray and IBM are a different story.

Ban Microsoft (2)

sinuscavity (2886369) | about a year ago | (#43424127)

In response Russia should ban someone like Microsoft for working against its foreign policy interests. Russia is already a nuclear power -- what advantages or threats is this going to bring to the world? This is about undermining Russian industry and nothing else. It's a sort of economic warfare.

Out of business (3, Funny)

T.E.D. (34228) | about a year ago | (#43424217)

An email address that T-Platforms listed for its German office bounced, and Slashdot was unable to reach executives at its Russian headquarters for comment."

That's because T-Platforms has gone out of business. Most unfortunate.

However, there's somebody here from a new supercomputer company "U-Platforms", that would like to speak with you about purchasing some HPC microprocessors...

USSR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424299)

Why did the USSR and Red China have governmental policies against formal religious organizations and structures?

A: They didn't want dog-dick sucking (advocates), dog shit eating (fanatics), religious zealots banding together and taking over the financial framework of the nation. Green eggs and ham is a crime "against the state".

Hindsight is always 20:20. We see how it worked out. The secret international ba-ra (joke ra, joke sultan) ca-ca (shit) eaters union has been around for much longer than the USSR or Red China.

learn more @ http://mapfortu.wikidot.com

they're using it for nuclear research? (1)

chilenexus (2660641) | about a year ago | (#43424307)

Yikes, who knows what kind of things would happen if the Russians ever get their hands on a nuke! We've got to stop them from developing nucular weapons at all costs, or they'll corrupt our precious bodily fluids!

Re:they're using it for nuclear research? (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about a year ago | (#43424405)

it's come to this... toe to toe with the russians in new-clear-ar combat.

Re:they're using it for nuclear research? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424507)

As I recall, the Brits gave us Radar and the Jet engine for free, and helped us develop the nuclear bomb, and then we turned around and said that they couldn't have any information about it, so they had to develop one entirely separately...

Re:they're using it for nuclear research? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43424547)

Thank you, I needed that!

T-platforms is a Russian company (3, Informative)

Mike_EE_U_of_I (1493783) | about a year ago | (#43424407)

T-platforms is a Russian company headquartered in Moscow. This is no more surprising than Boeing selling military equipment to the USA.

Export control on computers needs to stop (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | about a year ago | (#43424419)

US export control on computers needs to stop. The need for it ended decades ago. All US nuclear weapons were designed with computers below 10 MIPS, and in many cases below 1 MIPS. (The most recent US nuclear weapon design is from the mid-1970s.) The problem isn't getting any harder.

Re:Export control on computers needs to stop (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43424649)

no, most recent US. weapons designs are from at least the late 80s, even though those weapons not deployed some test versions made.

Re:Export control on computers needs to stop (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#43424723)

you forget maintenance of an aging fleet of weapons does require supercomputers, quite powerful ones

Re:Export control on computers needs to stop (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43425021)

you forget maintenance of an aging fleet of weapons does require supercomputers, quite powerful ones

sure, if the contractor says so.

there's other stuff to calculate with them though and I guess designing bombs you're never going to even attempt at building is a pretty good business.

Re:Export control on computers needs to stop (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#43425641)

it's not the contractors that say so, it is the reality of aging explosive lenses, initiators, neutron reflectors, etc. the alternative is live testing.

Re:Export control on computers needs to stop (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43426935)

Or you could just buy lobsters instead of trying to catch them yourself.

Re:Export control on computers needs to stop (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year ago | (#43427273)

US export control on computers needs to stop. The need for it ended decades ago. All US nuclear weapons were designed with computers below 10 MIPS, and in many cases below 1 MIPS. (The most recent US nuclear weapon design is from the mid-1970s.) The problem isn't getting any harder.

While a computer helps a great deal, the US also had years of experience, a brigade of experienced designers, a well tested and proven set of basic components (especially the primary) and could haul a candidate device out into the desert to set it off and see if the results matched the calculations.
 
A modern wannabe nuclear state has none of these things.
 
Thus, it's not about really all about the design.. it's also about testing that design. With a really fast computer you can run a bunch of simulations to test and optimize your design... (Despite their apparent simplicity, there's a lot of subtle complexities in even a basic, unboosted, single stage nuclear weapon.) Thus it's really useful if you want to test your design without letting the whole world know by setting off a real one. It's also extremely useful if you want to produce a small, weaponized, device without years of simulation, non-nuclear experimentation, and nuclear tests.
 
But there's also a more subtle reason nuclear programs need fast computers (one often missed by those unfamiliar with the issues)... stockpile verification. Remember what I said above about experiments and testing? That doesn't just happen when the device is designed and prepared for service - it also happens while the device is in service to make sure that various age related physical changes to the weapon don't reduce it's yield or reliability or (worst case) dud it entirely. Under the current test ban, such testing has been banned, leaving simulation the only viable option.

There are no principles, only interests... (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43424587)

Attributed to Vladimir Lenin, though I am unable to verify. Either way, all the world's governments are confirming the statement.

"Slashdot was unable to reach executives..." (1)

mutube (981006) | about a year ago | (#43424693)

Since when did Slashdot start doing real journalism?

Re:"Slashdot was unable to reach executives..." (0, Troll)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#43425163)

Since when did Slashdot start doing real journalism?

Never. The submitter, Nerval's Lobster [slashdot.org] , is a frequently-accepted shill that submits stories for Slashdot's "business intelligence" and "cloud" channels, which are usually paid advertisements disguised as journalism.

The submitter's name is a pun in reference to 19th-century French surrealist poet Gérard de Nerval [wikipedia.org] , who had a pet lobster he would take for walks in the Palais Royal gardens in Paris on the end of a blue silk ribbon. He was quoted as having said, "Why should a lobster be any more ridiculous than a dog? ...or a cat, or a gazelle, or a lion, or any other animal that one chooses to take for a walk? I have a liking for lobsters. They are peaceful, serious creatures. They know the secrets of the sea, they don't bark, and they don't gnaw upon one's monadic privacy like dogs do."

Dice sees paid content writers as pets on a ribbon it takes for walks in the Slashdot gardens. When people comment that it is absurd to masquerade these paid content writers as journalists, Dice asks why a paid content writer should be any more ridiculous than a journalist. Or a cat, or a gazelle, or a troll, or other animal. It likes paid content writers. They are peaceful, serious creatures that keep secrets, don't bark and don't gnaw upon one's privacy like journalists do.

The only thing funny about the pun is that it's fairly obvious and we haven't noticed.

Re:"Slashdot was unable to reach executives..." (1)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#43426663)

That was not a troll. By "never," I meant that Slashdot doesn't produce journalism, it aggregates it. I was pointing out that this story's submitter, Nerval's Lobster, is not a user, but a shill [wikipedia.org] that exists solely to submit Slashdot-produced content (slashdot.org/topic/) to Slashdot and is nearly always posted by the editors. See a brief sampling of Nerval's Lobster's very recent history below. Note that he/she never makes any comments in discussions, but submits about 10 stories a week and nearly all of them are posted. How many real users have a success rate like that?

4/11
"Winnti" Attacks on Online Gaming Servers Dissected
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, (NOT POSTED)
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/datacenter/winnti-attacks-on-online-gaming-servers-dissected/ [slashdot.org]

U.S. Government Blocks Sales to Russian Supercomputer Maker
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by Timothy [slashdot.org]
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/datacenter/u-s-govt-blocks-sales-to-russian-supercomputer-maker/ [slashdot.org]

4/10
How Google Fiber Could Do Some National Good, or At Least Scare the Carriers
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by Soulskill [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/how-google-fiber-could-do-some-national-good/ [slashdot.org]

If Apple and Yahoo Got Together, What Would the Baby Look Like?
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, (NOT POSTED)
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/if-apple-and-yahoo-got-together-what-would-the-baby-look-like/ [slashdot.org]

4/8
Should California Have Banned Checking Smartphone Maps While Driving?
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by Samzenpus [slashdot.org]
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/checking-a-smartphone-map-while-driving-banned-in-california/ [slashdot.org]

HP Hopes Its 'Moonshot' Project Will Kick Off a Big Shift
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Not posted, but Unknown Lamer posted a story submitted by "new submitter" linatux (who has never submitted anything else, and has never posted any comments) that linked to the same slashdot-paid-content
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/datacenter/hp-hopes-moonshot-servers-will-kick-off-big-shift/ [slashdot.org]

4/5 Ask Slashdot: Is Making Government More Open and Connected a Good Idea?
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by soulskill [slashdot.org]
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/is-government-2-0-a-bad-concept/ [slashdot.org]

4/4
Facebook Launches "Home" for Android
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by Timothy [slashdot.org]
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/facebook-launches-home-less-than-an-os-more-than-an-app/ [slashdot.org]

4/3
HP Thinks It Can Turn Autonomy Around
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by Unknown Lamer [slashdot.org]
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/bi/hp-thinks-it-can-turn-autonomy-around/ [slashdot.org]

Next-Gen 400-GbE Development Set to Begin
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, (NOT POSTED)
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/datacenter/next-gen-400-gbe-development-set-to-begin/ [slashdot.org]

4/2
Nebula Debuts "Cloud Computer" Based on OpenStack
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by soulskill [slashdot.org]
Links to http://slashdot.org/topic/datacenter/nebula-debuts-cloud-computer-based-on-openstack/ [slashdot.org]

Google Glass and Surveillance Culture
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster, Posted by Timothy [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/google-glass-and-surveillance-culture/ [slashdot.org]

It's interesting that I was very quickly modded down as a troll from 2 to 0 for pointing this out. Keep modding me down and I'll have a linked list showing the number of times I've been modded down for pointing out obvious shills.

Re:"Slashdot was unable to reach executives..." (1)

Magada (741361) | about a year ago | (#43430671)

I wish I had mod points to give. Some asshat modded the informative parent post "troll" for some reason.

A better idea... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43425013)

...would be to ban Chinese imports into the States and dig the fucking U.S. economy out of the pit it's in. Too bad Obama is too busy kissing their ass and sending even more jobs overseas to ever let that happen. You can't achieve that by banning the sale of products to certain people, companies and even countries.

And while they're at it, open new business opportunities with the legalization of both hemp and marijuana, and get rid of that fucking pathetic "war on some drugs" that has flopped more than any dying fish in history.

This whole fucking country is in some serious need of federal law reform. I don't know what the god damn government is trying to prove by blocking Russia from buying computer hardware, except that they are a bunch of dumbasses. China is right next door, and ironically, I'd surprised if any of the computers I've owned had a part exclusively made in the U.S.... it's all China... so I'm a bit lost as to why Russia would come to the U.S. to seek their CPU fix anyway.

To the Government: Pull your heads out of your asses. Get your motherfucking priorities straight.

Silly and stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43426131)

Like anything electronic is manufactured in the US anymore... Heck most of is is probably designed overseas now too. The end result is some fat cat American business buying cheap shit from China/Korea/etc, and reselling it to the Russians is SOL. They will just buy it directly from the Chinese/Koreans/etc. Now its going to come with a lenovo/asus/etc logo instead of an Dell/IBM/HP/CISCO one. The one or two components they can't buy from China/etc (large infiniband switch?) will be redesigned in a couple years by some Foreign company that sees a buyer.

Re (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43426277)

upto I saw the draft four $8907, I accept that my neighbour was like actualey earning money in there spare time online.. there best friend started doing this for less than twenty one months and just cleared the dept on there home and bought a new Ariel Atom. we looked here, BIC5.COM

thanksss (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43427585)

This particular article was in fact exactly what I had been looking for!

www.tvgoog.com

They could use ARM (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#43428145)

ARM CPU's manufactured at TSMC completely removes the US from the supply chain. Paying royalties to a British company and manufacturing in Taiwan.

They already have them? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43429285)

It's a bit late to stop their development. Also, there is no longer an east/west divide. There are countries fully capable of building super computers that are more then willing to do business with Russia.

WTO membership obliges (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43430439)

Isn't this a breach against WTO. Russia is a member, USA has no business blocking them.

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>