Something like take the face value of the option and divide by 10- that's what they're worth to you when you get them (on average).
Of course you may luck out, and sell them at the high point and make much more than that, but it's never possible to know where the high point was until the stock has tanked.
Basically, they're typically worth very little, but employees imagine that they're worth a lot, and that's why employers think that they are good incentives;-)
Because... Re:Would you want to?
on
Cloning Mammoths
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Because, they reproduce slowly, and they're finger-lickin good;-)
(Mammoths died out only 5000-10000 years ago- they definitely would have had run ins with our ancestors.)
So if the electricity is going down the chain to the dog (which it likely would not, since that's not the path of least resistance to the ground),
Actually, the chain is an excellent conductor, and the dog is pretty much a big bag of salty water, which is a very good conductor. The ground, particularly if it is earth is a reasonable conductor. So, on the whole, it's quite likely to be the path of least resistance.
the dog could only get shocked if the path was open.
If it is a rusted spike, it's quite likely to be open circuit.
While urine would perhaps make this path more conducive (I can't honestly say I've stood in pee and shocked myself),
Very much so. Urine contains quite a bit of salt- salt water is an excellent conductor.
it's higly unlikely any urination would be forced in the first place.
The poor dog is being shocked through it's neck and through it's paws. It's very likely to get most upset, and worried, and urinate.
Additionally as soon as it urinates, the shock stops. The dog will work this out over time, and deliberately urinate in the right place to stop the electricity. It's very plausible.
Whether it really happened though; I don't know. It could very well have done, but that doesn't mean it did.
A friend of mine's kid uses linux exclusively at home, and when the kids on the schoolbus found out, they backed away from her in shock and informed her that linux "was illegal" and she could be arrested "for being a hacker using that."
No, she should tell them that it's OK. Her parents are licensed Linux users, and the license (GPL!) covers her too.
*cough* That would be, he turned to the Russian Government from whom to purchase his flight.
Yes. They're better at communism, they've had more practice, and their hardware turns out cheaper.
When a private corporation builds their own launch infrastructure, vehicle,
You mean like orbital sciences?
and private orbiting hotel
Yes, well, no one has done that yet, yet.
We may be at stage two already (ready to hand some of the technology over to private hands) but we certainly would never have gotten there without public funding.
Nice guess. No way to know right now. I do know that Goddard worked with private money though. You seem to be suggesting that rocketry is inherently horrendously expensive. I know a fair bit about rocketry, and I don't agree.
What do you plan to dock to anyway in a 15 minute flight, when all the orbital objects are moving about 7.8km/s faster than you are. What you going to do, grab on as it goes past? Hint: no.
Why? NASA is only a governmental department. Why on earth would you want the government to deliver you to space; when that means in practice that a committee chooses who has their great honour of deciding who they feel like sending, based mostly on how well they toe the party line?
Me, I think that Dennis Tito did it right- buy a flight at the lowest price he could. Ok, so it turned out to be the Ruskies, I call that an incentive to Americans to actually get off their money-wasting duffs and actually go out and make competitive rockets rather than the government subsidised massively overpriced efforts you see at the moment.
I mean, everyone acts like 'high technology' is the answer. Nope. Sorry. 'Low Cost' is the answer. And you nearly always don't get that from Government run operations. Government departments want to grow; they don't want to shrink. They don't want higher efficiency, because that just means they can do the same with less, that just means that their 'excess' budget gets cut and they end up doing the same amount for lower cost.
No. We need businesses. Businesses actually have an incentive to grow the market. Launching more often actually makes launching cheaper, and this in turn grows the market and hence the business and the total profits. Businesses win over governments.
Frankly, if you're proNASA you're pretty much a communist- (no I'm not trolling, not everything that seems controversial is a troll) NASA is run by the country 'for the good of the country'. I don't want that. I want launching into space to be done for profit, not because they want to be nice to everyone. Being nice does not scale like profit motive does. We need to scale space up to put a reasonable number of people into space, you and me.
- only if you make it look deliberate. We don't want the spammers to carry on thinking that we like receiving spam.
:-)
Nah, on second thoughts, signing them up for every catalogue and ensuring that their telephone number isn't on the national do-not-call list is more fitting.
The next Shuttle wasn't due to launch for several weeks- Columbia only had supplies like air, power for about two weeks max. ISS was out; Soyuz can't launch to that orbit (it would have to drop the first stage on mainland China). Basically, there were no options, other than try to rush the next Shuttle through, and that might well not have made it up there in time.
When that same styrofoam cup is tossed out of the window, it would decelerate much less than it would on the ground.
No. Actually the maximum aerodynamic drag (and hence the maximum deceleration) is at 'max-q', about 1 minute into the flight. The accident happened a little after that, at 82 seconds, but there's still a lot of air around, and the vehicle is going very fast.
It seems to have been not only the size of the chunk but where it hit, what angle it hit at and whether it was rotating as it hit. That'a whole heap of variables- and the gotcha of all of this is that there wasn't supposed by foam falling off in the first place;-(
Not quite. The prevailing theory was that it made a crack in the wing, not a gaping hole. Now they've seen the hole- it makes a lot more sense- the hot gases would have been chewing into the wing, really early on in the reentry.
However, why couldn't there be a RSA or symmetric encryption for 802.11[x]?
Doesn't really work in this case. It's the network at these shows that is untrustworthy not just the airwaves. The only thing the WEP (if it works right) is good for is keeping people you don't want off your network; it doesn't actually add any significant security for the user from the network. So as a user in 99% of all cases you want end-end security, not point-point; because at each of these points the traffic is unencrypted and can then be sniffed.
But if your rocket is working properly, where is the harm to the US it could require compensation for?
Yeah, but you or they don't know that until you launch; (in fact you don't even know that afterwards, check out Columbia and Challenger, those bugs were there from the beginning.) So if you launch without the proper documents; you're going to get royally screwed, even if it was a successful launch (that time).
Actually, the FAA approval is reasonably difficult for rocket launches.
Yes, probably true, but do you really want to change that?
Actually, I probably should have said unreasonably difficult, and yes.
This would be only true if the US governs the particular state you are talking about (and then it's US territory).
Bzzzt. Wrong. US laws do not necessarily end at the boarders of the USA.
The international agreements say that the country whose citizens launched the vehicle are liable for any damage that it does. It's up to the country to recover the costs from the citizens. So; the US government has a whole bunch of regulations that they apply to any of their citizens, wherever they happen to be living in the world, whenever they launch.
Of course in practice, they probably won't enforce the consequences of not following them until you return to America, but as a US citizen you still have to obey these laws.
Not from an ISP, but there has been atleast one case where a manufacturer uses microwave pumping for improving the efficiency of flourescent bulbs- trouble is; it screws up WiFi for literally miles around...
Slashdot Mirror
Of course you may luck out, and sell them at the high point and make much more than that, but it's never possible to know where the high point was until the stock has tanked.
Basically, they're typically worth very little, but employees imagine that they're worth a lot, and that's why employers think that they are good incentives ;-)
(Mammoths died out only 5000-10000 years ago- they definitely would have had run ins with our ancestors.)
Actually, the chain is an excellent conductor, and the dog is pretty much a big bag of salty water, which is a very good conductor. The ground, particularly if it is earth is a reasonable conductor. So, on the whole, it's quite likely to be the path of least resistance.
the dog could only get shocked if the path was open.
If it is a rusted spike, it's quite likely to be open circuit.
While urine would perhaps make this path more conducive (I can't honestly say I've stood in pee and shocked myself),
Very much so. Urine contains quite a bit of salt- salt water is an excellent conductor.
it's higly unlikely any urination would be forced in the first place.
The poor dog is being shocked through it's neck and through it's paws. It's very likely to get most upset, and worried, and urinate.
Additionally as soon as it urinates, the shock stops. The dog will work this out over time, and deliberately urinate in the right place to stop the electricity. It's very plausible.
Whether it really happened though; I don't know. It could very well have done, but that doesn't mean it did.
No, she should tell them that it's OK. Her parents are licensed Linux users, and the license (GPL!) covers her too.
Yes. They're better at communism, they've had more practice, and their hardware turns out cheaper.
When a private corporation builds their own launch infrastructure, vehicle,
You mean like orbital sciences?
and private orbiting hotel
Yes, well, no one has done that yet, yet.
We may be at stage two already (ready to hand some of the technology over to private hands) but we certainly would never have gotten there without public funding.
Nice guess. No way to know right now. I do know that Goddard worked with private money though. You seem to be suggesting that rocketry is inherently horrendously expensive. I know a fair bit about rocketry, and I don't agree.
What do you plan to dock to anyway in a 15 minute flight, when all the orbital objects are moving about 7.8km/s faster than you are. What you going to do, grab on as it goes past? Hint: no.
Me, I think that Dennis Tito did it right- buy a flight at the lowest price he could. Ok, so it turned out to be the Ruskies, I call that an incentive to Americans to actually get off their money-wasting duffs and actually go out and make competitive rockets rather than the government subsidised massively overpriced efforts you see at the moment.
I mean, everyone acts like 'high technology' is the answer. Nope. Sorry. 'Low Cost' is the answer. And you nearly always don't get that from Government run operations. Government departments want to grow; they don't want to shrink. They don't want higher efficiency, because that just means they can do the same with less, that just means that their 'excess' budget gets cut and they end up doing the same amount for lower cost.
No. We need businesses. Businesses actually have an incentive to grow the market. Launching more often actually makes launching cheaper, and this in turn grows the market and hence the business and the total profits. Businesses win over governments.
Frankly, if you're proNASA you're pretty much a communist- (no I'm not trolling, not everything that seems controversial is a troll) NASA is run by the country 'for the good of the country'. I don't want that. I want launching into space to be done for profit, not because they want to be nice to everyone. Being nice does not scale like profit motive does. We need to scale space up to put a reasonable number of people into space, you and me.
The X-prize is suborbital. Still, supporting a similar orbital prize may very well be a good idea.
Or something ;-)
Nah, on second thoughts, signing them up for every catalogue and ensuring that their telephone number isn't on the national do-not-call list is more fitting.
"And the last thing I remember thinking was- what could go wrong?" ;-)
My theory is that it was all computer generated, they couldn't really have built their own aeroplanes out of junk and flew them, could they?? ;-)
You rotter! I just crashed my station wagon!
The next Shuttle wasn't due to launch for several weeks- Columbia only had supplies like air, power for about two weeks max. ISS was out; Soyuz can't launch to that orbit (it would have to drop the first stage on mainland China). Basically, there were no options, other than try to rush the next Shuttle through, and that might well not have made it up there in time.
No. Actually the maximum aerodynamic drag (and hence the maximum deceleration) is at 'max-q', about 1 minute into the flight. The accident happened a little after that, at 82 seconds, but there's still a lot of air around, and the vehicle is going very fast.
It seems to have been not only the size of the chunk but where it hit, what angle it hit at and whether it was rotating as it hit. That'a whole heap of variables- and the gotcha of all of this is that there wasn't supposed by foam falling off in the first place ;-(
Not quite. The prevailing theory was that it made a crack in the wing, not a gaping hole. Now they've seen the hole- it makes a lot more sense- the hot gases would have been chewing into the wing, really early on in the reentry.
However they do have https'd web interfaces to the mail servers, so you can always use that at these conferences, and that would be secure.
Doesn't really work in this case. It's the network at these shows that is untrustworthy not just the airwaves. The only thing the WEP (if it works right) is good for is keeping people you don't want off your network; it doesn't actually add any significant security for the user from the network. So as a user in 99% of all cases you want end-end security, not point-point; because at each of these points the traffic is unencrypted and can then be sniffed.
They're not a bunch of cheapskates! They used the printer ink; naturally.
Yeah, but you or they don't know that until you launch; (in fact you don't even know that afterwards, check out Columbia and Challenger, those bugs were there from the beginning.) So if you launch without the proper documents; you're going to get royally screwed, even if it was a successful launch (that time).
Yes, probably true, but do you really want to change that?
Actually, I probably should have said unreasonably difficult, and yes.
This would be only true if the US governs the particular state you are talking about (and then it's US territory).
Bzzzt. Wrong. US laws do not necessarily end at the boarders of the USA.
The international agreements say that the country whose citizens launched the vehicle are liable for any damage that it does. It's up to the country to recover the costs from the citizens. So; the US government has a whole bunch of regulations that they apply to any of their citizens, wherever they happen to be living in the world, whenever they launch.
Of course in practice, they probably won't enforce the consequences of not following them until you return to America, but as a US citizen you still have to obey these laws.
Yes the sail is moving relative to itself- it's accelerating. There is no reference frame on the sail (atleast not an inertial one).
Alright, half a mile. link is here
Not from an ISP, but there has been atleast one case where a manufacturer uses microwave pumping for improving the efficiency of flourescent bulbs- trouble is; it screws up WiFi for literally miles around...