Vicious Viruses or Artifficial Intelligence at 3:01 AM

Our computers were stricken by one of the most vicious and ingenious strain of virus/malware/Trojan system I have ever seen. It was a multi stage and multi component system composed of a timer based installer, a downloader that contains another downloader that in turn installs viruses that install other viruses. In addition this system operates in worm mode and installs itself on any other computer in the network exploiting the latest zero day security holes. In addition it uninstalls the antivirus on the computer and disables the firewall and the automatic updates, and preventing the installation of antiviruses. Because of the way it works the antivirus software took close to four days to discovers all the hidden features, slipping back between safe mode, offline updates and other methods of removing the virus. I am still unsure that it is behind me.

One of the most logical question would be: What do these operators and programmers stand to gain from designing a system on such a huge scale? The surprising answer is hundreds of millions of dollars, perhaps even billions! Over the last few years I have been working alongside with some of the major Internet marketing experts, which gave me insight to the problem. One of the key components in any successful internet marketing strategy is affiliate programs. These programs allow the vendor to expand the services to customers and add value to the site.

As an example, suppose we have a website that helps people find movers in their area. suppose you visit the above site and click on boxes. The boxes are supplied by a third party. Most affiliate programs have a vendor ID that is assigned to the link and a cookie to help track that the user indeed was referred by the vendor. This allows the user to leave the site. If on a subsequent visit the user decides to buy a product or service, the vendor would be granted a percentage of the sale. It use to be common practice to install a frame called a "invisible popup" in the page to mark the client and pay money to perpetrators, but newer browsers block these attempts.

I think you now all understand why these malware/viruses are such a lucrative business. By opening up as many sites as possible before being removed you are actually tagging these sites so if you purchase from any of these sites within three months you are paying the pirates a large percentage of the sale. For example if a Trojan popped up Amazon, then every purchase will pocket at least 4% of the profits (see this for example)

A couple of years ago I turned down a very high paying job offer to develop such malware for a company that makes well over 100M in profits every year from this scam. This is only one in a list of hundreds of companies worldwide that exist to exploit these security problems.

Unlike battling pirates in a million square mile area, government can battle the virus operators by the racketeering laws to follow the money trail and shut these operations down. They can investigate and expose the operators by infecting computers with the viruses and see what affiliate programs are tagged. Then they can hold payments by the affiliate programs. I think that these measures would be far more effective that trying to nail a specific individual. By drying up the pond, you get rid of the mosquitoes.

It would appear that I am in the business of making viruses - that is not the case - I went to a job interview and when I did a background check of what the company does that is what I discovered. I decided that morally I cant be associated with such a company

GM, DaimlerChrysler, BMW Premiere Unprecedented Hybrid Technology at 10:11 AM

The state-of-the-art full hybrid system, whose components are being co-developed by General Motors Corp., DaimlerChrysler and the BMW Group for production beginning next year, represents a major automotive industry milestone due to the unprecedented fully integrated combination of electric motors with a fixed-gear transmission.

As a result of its low- and high-speed electric continuously variable transmission (ECVT) modes, the system is commonly referred to as the 2-mode hybrid. However, the sophisticated fuel-saving system also incorporates four fixed gear ratios for high efficiency and power-handling capabilities in a broad variety of vehicle applications. During the two ECVT modes and four fixed gear operations, the hybrid system can use the electric motors for boosting and regenerative braking.

In summary, the four fixed gears overlay two ECVT modes for a total of six operating functions:

• Input-split ECVT mode, or continuously variable Mode 1, operates from vehicle launch through the second fixed gear ratio.
• Compound-split ECVT mode, or continuously variable Mode 2, operates after the second fixed gear ratio.
• First fixed-gear ratio with both electric motors available to boost the internal combustion engine or capture and store energy from regenerative braking, deceleration and coasting.
• Second fixed-gear ratio with one electric motor available for boost/braking,
• Third fixed-gear ratio with two electric motors available for boost/braking.
• Fourth fixed-gear ratio with one electric motor available for boost/braking.

The result is trend-setting hybrid technology that provides superior fuel economy, performance and load carrying capability.

The full hybrid system being co-developed by General Motors, DaimlerChrysler and the BMW Group has an overall mechanical content and size similar to a conventional automatic transmission, yet this full hybrid transmission can operate in infinitely variable gear ratios or one of the four fixed-gear ratios.

A sophisticated electronic control module constantly optimizes the entire hybrid powertrain system to select the most efficient operation point for the power level demanded by the driver.

Key Advantages

When compared to conventional hybrid systems, this avant-garde hybrid technology, relying on both the ECVT modes and the four fixed gear ratios, provides advantages in combined (city and highway) fuel economy, dynamics and towing capability.

Traditional hybrid systems typically have only one torque-splitting arrangement and no fixed mechanical ratios. These systems are often called “one-mode” hybrids. Due to their less capable mechanical content, one-mode hybrids need to transmit a significant amount of power through an electrical path that is 20 percent less efficient than a mechanical path. This requires usually substantial compromise in vehicle capability or reliance on larger electrical motors, which can create cost, weight and packaging issues.

General Motors, DaimlerChrysler and the BMW Group have conceived a full hybrid system featuring four fixed mechanical ratios, within the two ECVT modes, to reduce power transmission through the less efficient electrical path. Consequently, the electric motors are more compact and less dependent on engine size.

This combination of two ECVT modes and four fixed gear ratios eliminates the drawbacks of one-mode hybrid systems to allow for efficient operation throughout a vehicle’s operating range, at low and high speeds. It also allows for application across a broader variety of vehicles. It is particularly beneficial in demanding applications that require larger engines, such as towing, hill climbing or carrying heavy loads.

Existing internal combustion engines can be used with relatively minimal alteration because the full hybrid system imposes no significant limitation on the size or type of engine. It enables the three global automakers to package internal combustion engines with the full hybrid transmissions more cost-effectively and offer the fuel-saving technology across a wider range of vehicles.

Initial applications are suitable for front-engine, rear- and four-wheel-drive vehicle architectures, but the full hybrid system has the flexibility to be used in front-engine, front-wheel-drive architectures in the future as well.

Global Hybrid Cooperation

General Motors, DaimlerChrysler and the BMW Group have formed a cooperative effort called the Global Hybrid Cooperation, which is actively developing this next generation hybrid powertrain system. In an alliance of equals, all three partners are pooling expertise and resources to jointly and efficiently develop hybrid technology. Each company will individually integrate the full hybrid system into the design and manufacturing of vehicles in accordance with their brand specific requirements.

In Troy, Michigan, the “GM, DaimlerChrysler and BMW Hybrid Development Center” houses together engineers and specialists from all three companies to develop the complete hybrid system and the individual components -- electric motors, high-performance electronics, wiring, energy management, and hybrid system control units. In addition, the “GM, DaimlerChrysler and BMW Hybrid Development Center” will be responsible for system integration and project management.

A key factor in ensuring optimum development is the focus on a flexible system design that can be scaled to the size, mass and performance needs of the various vehicle concepts and brands. The extensive sharing of components and the collaborative relationship with suppliers will enable the alliance partners to achieve economies of scale and associated cost advantages that will also benefit customers. Currently full hybrid systems are under development for front- and rear-wheel-drive passenger cars, and light-duty truck and SUV applications.

General Motors Corp. , the world’s largest automaker, has been the global industry sales leader for 75 years. Founded in 1908, GM today employs about 327,000 people around the world. With global headquarters in Detroit, GM manufactures its cars and trucks in 33 countries. In 2005, 9.17 million GM cars and trucks were sold globally under the following brands: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, GM Daewoo, Holden, HUMMER, Opel, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn and Vauxhall. GM operates one of the world’s leading finance companies, GMAC Financial Services, which offers automotive, residential and commercial financing and insurance. GM’s OnStar subsidiary is the industry leader in vehicle safety, security and information services. More information on GM can be found at www.gm.com.

DaimlerChrysler’s product portfolio ranges from small cars to sports cars and luxury sedans; and from versatile vans to heavy duty trucks or comfortable coaches. DaimlerChrysler’s passenger car brands include Maybach, Mercedes-Benz, Chrysler, Jeep®, Dodge and smart. Commercial vehicle brands include Mercedes-Benz, Freightliner, Sterling, Western Star, Setra, Mitsubishi Fuso, Thomas Built Buses and Orion. DaimlerChrysler’s strategy rests on four pillars: Excellent products offering outstanding customer value, leading brands, innovations and technology leadership and global presence and networking. With 382,724 employees, DaimlerChrysler achieved revenues of €149.8 billion in 2005.

The BMW Group covers the BMW, MINI and Rolls-Royce brands. The BMW Group is the only automobile company worldwide to operate with all its brands exclusively in the premium segments of the automobile market, from the small car to the absolute top segment. The BMW Group's vehicles provide outstanding product substance in terms of aesthetic design, dynamic performance, cutting-edge technology and quality, underlining the company's leadership in technology and innovation. Today, with revenues of 46.7 billion euro, annual sales of 1.328 million automobiles (thereof 200,000 MINIs), 97,500 BMW motorcycles and with almost 106,000 associates, the BMW Group is one of the world's ten largest automobile manufacturers.

America’s fastest train moves ahead Funding boost propels maglev, which still faces headwinds at 1:43 PM

General Atomics The magnetic levitating train, or "maglev," can travel at up to 310 mph, and could compete with commercial airplanes, which cruise at about 550 mph.

a

Could America’s fastest train whisk us away from $4-a-gallon gas guzzlers?

Thanks to a $45 million infusion from a transportation bill signed by President Bush in early June, there could someday be a magnetic levitating train, or “maglev,” soaring from Disneyland to Las Vegas at a maximum speed of 310 mph — 180 mph on average.

After the research phase is complete in about three years, the private partnership behind the effort, American Magline Group, comes to its biggest crossroads: obtaining $12 billion in funding for construction.

“If we had the money tomorrow, we’d build it in five years,” he said.

What’s slowing down America’s fastest train, however, is the hefty cost of crafting the infrastructure — including the guideway — from scratch, because the fastest train can’t run on ordinary steel tracks. The $45 million from the federal government will only cover pre-construction obligations, including environmental testing in the Mojave Desert, where the line would be laid.

But as spiking gas prices and traffic pinch both nerves and wallets, and flight costs and delays hamper air travel, the maglev joins the list of alternatives to the nation’s transportation tribulations.

“With our gasoline prices and everything else going on, people and government are ready to make a commitment,” Cummings said. Until now, “we haven’t committed to high-speed trains in this country — at all.”

America’s fastest train could compete with air travel. Flying from Anaheim, Calif., to Vegas on a passenger jet cruising at about 550 mph can cost upward of $150, while a ticket for the same route on a maglev would cost $55, according to the American Magline Group.

Plus, the maglev doesn’t pollute. It’s energy efficient. And it's low-maintenance because the train levitates — thanks to magnets — avoiding wear-and-tear on the underlying “guideway.” That’s what propels the vehicle through a magnetic field established by the electrical grid. Upping the current accelerates the train. Lowering the current slows the train. And reversing the current stops or pushes the train backwards.

Paul Saffo, a Silicon Valley technology forecaster, said the lure of Las Vegas might just be what it takes to turn a profit with the maglev. The world’s first maglev, a 19-mile line in Shanghai, China, doesn’t garner enough traffic to offset the initial investment. But there are plans to extend the route, with hopes of attracting enough riders to reach critical mass.

While the California-Nevada maglev has scored the most federal funding to date, two other lines, from Pittsburgh International Airport to downtown and from Baltimore to D.C., are also competing for federal dollars for construction.

The two East Coast lines make sense to many, and Cummings of the American Magline Group said the Disneyland-to-Vegas line is more than what critics have dismissed it as: a “gamblers’ express.”

Is America's fastest train a practical solution for our transportation woes?

While the Western line aims to relieve traffic on the congested Interstate 15 highway which leads to “Sin City,” the first two segments, which would connect Las Vegas to Primm, Nev., and Orange County to Ontario, Calif., could shoot commuters to work and back home, he said.

“It’s an exciting alternative if you want to live in the suburbs, outside the main city,” Cummings said.

Not everyone is convinced a Maglev is a good idea. The Federal Railway Administration argues transportation dollars should aid America’s current public transportation system. The railway administration, which asked for $100 million in funding from the federal government, only received $30 million under the recent transportation bill.

“It’s great to have a train that goes 200 mph from Disneyland to Las Vegas, but that money could improve things in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, New York ... Seattle,” said FRA spokesman Steve Kulm.

New and Improved Antimatter Spaceship for Mars Missions at 10:21 AM

Most self-respecting starships in science fiction stories use antimatter as fuel for a good reason – it’s the most potent fuel known. While tons of chemical fuel are needed to propel a human mission to Mars, just tens of milligrams of antimatter will do (a milligram is about one-thousandth the weight of a piece of the original M&M candy).

Image right: A spacecraft powered by a positron reactor would resemble this artist's concept of the Mars Reference Mission spacecraft. Credit: NASA

However, in reality this power comes with a price. Some antimatter reactions produce blasts of high energy gamma rays. Gamma rays are like X-rays on steroids. They penetrate matter and break apart molecules in cells, so they are not healthy to be around. High-energy gamma rays can also make the engines radioactive by fragmenting atoms of the engine material.

The NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) is funding a team of researchers working on a new design for an antimatter-powered spaceship that avoids this nasty side effect by producing gamma rays with much lower energy.

Antimatter is sometimes called the mirror image of normal matter because while it looks just like ordinary matter, some properties are reversed. For example, normal electrons, the familiar particles that carry electric current in everything from cell phones to plasma TVs, have a negative electric charge. Anti-electrons have a positive charge, so scientists dubbed them "positrons".

When antimatter meets matter, both annihilate in a flash of energy. This complete conversion to energy is what makes antimatter so powerful. Even the nuclear reactions that power atomic bombs come in a distant second, with only about three percent of their mass converted to energy.

Previous antimatter-powered spaceship designs employed antiprotons, which produce high-energy gamma rays when they annihilate. The new design will use positrons, which make gamma rays with about 400 times less energy.

The NIAC research is a preliminary study to see if the idea is feasible. If it looks promising, and funds are available to successfully develop the technology, a positron-powered spaceship would have a couple advantages over the existing plans for a human mission to Mars, called the Mars Reference Mission.

Image left: A diagram of a rocket powered by a positron reactor. Positrons are directed from the storage unit to the attenuating matrix, where they interact with the material and release heat. Liquid hydrogen (H2) circulates through the attenuating matrix and picks up the heat. The hydrogen then flows to the nozzle exit (bell-shaped area in yellow and blue), where it expands into space, producing thrust. Print-resolution copy Credit: Positronics Research, LLC

"The most significant advantage is more safety," said Dr. Gerald Smith of Positronics Research, LLC, in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The current Reference Mission calls for a nuclear reactor to propel the spaceship to Mars. This is desirable because nuclear propulsion reduces travel time to Mars, increasing safety for the crew by reducing their exposure to cosmic rays. Also, a chemically-powered spacecraft weighs much more and costs a lot more to launch. The reactor also provides ample power for the three-year mission. But nuclear reactors are complex, so more things could potentially go wrong during the mission. "However, the positron reactor offers the same advantages but is relatively simple," said Smith, lead researcher for the NIAC study.

Also, nuclear reactors are radioactive even after their fuel is used up. After the ship arrives at Mars, Reference Mission plans are to direct the reactor into an orbit that will not encounter Earth for at least a million years, when the residual radiation will be reduced to safe levels. However, there is no leftover radiation in a positron reactor after the fuel is used up, so there is no safety concern if the spent positron reactor should accidentally re-enter Earth's atmosphere, according to the team.

It will be safer to launch as well. If a rocket carrying a nuclear reactor explodes, it could release radioactive particles into the atmosphere. "Our positron spacecraft would release a flash of gamma-rays if it exploded, but the gamma rays would be gone in an instant. There would be no radioactive particles to drift on the wind. The flash would also be confined to a relatively small area. The danger zone would be about a kilometer (about a half-mile) around the spacecraft. An ordinary large chemically-powered rocket has a danger zone of about the same size, due to the big fireball that would result from its explosion," said Smith.

Another significant advantage is speed. The Reference Mission spacecraft would take astronauts to Mars in about 180 days. "Our advanced designs, like the gas core and the ablative engine concepts, could take astronauts to Mars in half that time, and perhaps even in as little as 45 days," said Kirby Meyer, an engineer with Positronics Research on the study.

Advanced engines do this by running hot, which increases their efficiency or "specific impulse" (Isp). Isp is the "miles per gallon" of rocketry: the higher the Isp, the faster you can go before you use up your fuel supply. The best chemical rockets, like NASA's Space Shuttle main engine, max out at around 450 seconds, which means a pound of fuel will produce a pound of thrust for 450 seconds. A nuclear or positron reactor can make over 900 seconds. The ablative engine, which slowly vaporizes itself to produce thrust, could go as high as 5,000 seconds.

Image right: This is an artist's concept of an advanced positron rocket engine, called an ablative engine. This engine produces thrust when material in the nozzle is vaporized (ablated). In the image, the engine emits blue-white exhaust as thin layers of material are vaporized by positrons in tiny capsules surrounded by lead. The capsules are shot into the nozzle compartment many times per second. Once in the nozzle compartment, the positrons are allowed to interact with the capsule, releasing gamma rays. The lead absorbs the gamma rays and radiates lower-energy X-rays, which vaporize the nozzle material. This complication is necessary because X-rays are more efficiently absorbed by the nozzle material than gamma rays would be. Credit: Positronics Research, LLC

One technical challenge to making a positron spacecraft a reality is the cost to produce the positrons. Because of its spectacular effect on normal matter, there is not a lot of antimatter sitting around. In space, it is created in collisions of high-speed particles called cosmic rays. On Earth, it has to be created in particle accelerators, immense machines that smash atoms together. The machines are normally used to discover how the universe works on a deep, fundamental level, but they can be harnessed as antimatter factories.

"A rough estimate to produce the 10 milligrams of positrons needed for a human Mars mission is about 250 million dollars using technology that is currently under development," said Smith. This cost might seem high, but it has to be considered against the extra cost to launch a heavier chemical rocket (current launch costs are about $10,000 per pound) or the cost to fuel and make safe a nuclear reactor. "Based on the experience with nuclear technology, it seems reasonable to expect positron production cost to go down with more research," added Smith.

Another challenge is storing enough positrons in a small space. Because they annihilate normal matter, you can't just stuff them in a bottle. Instead, they have to be contained with electric and magnetic fields. "We feel confident that with a dedicated research and development program, these challenges can be overcome," said Smith.

If this is so, perhaps the first humans to reach Mars will arrive in spaceships powered by the same source that fired starships across the universes of our science fiction dreams.

Bill Steigerwald
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center