[geeks] Re: geeks digest, Vol 1 #2172 - 20 msgs

[dana at dtn.com]

dave at cca.org wrote:
>Last I heard, not that I've been following it too closely,
>an effective non-nuclear EMP device had still not been
>demonstrated.

That depends on your definition of effective.  Range is obviously an issue.

>Defense contractors trying to get money to defend against
>them have been hyping the threat for years, but the reality
>has been lagging behind...

No, No, that was "Cyber[war-terrorism]" that they've been hyping for years.
EMP protection is just kinda an offshoot from the "TEMPEST" protection
crowd.

Dan