If his employer was tracking him, it must have been for work purposes, right? So since he was on the clock, he should at least be paid his contracted rate for all the time he was tracked.
"That sounds like a reasoned response. Got any research to back it up? Of course, for suitable research to actually be meaningful, it would probably require recognised experts in commerce and education. Might want a quick trip down to your local university to see if you can find some.
Oh, wait. You don't believe in them. Well, you just go ahead spouting unsupported statements."
Most amusing.
To treat your post seriously for a moment, you're overlooking a very substantial truth: Good science is arrived at by an open process, not by a university's stamp of certification. Recognized experts are entirely optional to good science.
I'll freely admit that I've done no studies; although salted with fact, what I wrote above is opinion not science. But there's nothing stopping someone from doing science on these questions, inside academia or out.
Don't confuse anti-academicism with anti-intellectualism. People are just as interested in learning as they ever were, but the monopoly on higher education held by the university system for the last couple centuries is crumbling in the face of the freer exchange of ideas offered by the internet.
Universities are in the content delivery and certification business. They're suffering the same internet-related issues as other content delivery systems as other options become viable. (Khan Academy, anyone?) But worse for them, they've allowed their certification standards to steadily be weakened, while at the same time raising their prices far faster than inflation. Faced with paying ridiculous prices for weak degrees when free options abound, it's hardy surprising that many choose to opt out.
I had a customer (a small town government) recently have port 25 outbound blocked by Comcast. After going around with Comcast for a bit, it turned out that they were subscribed to a residential-class service, which has port 25 outbound blocked by an implacable policy. The only way to get the port unblocked in this case would have been to move them to a business-class service with a static IP. (Fortunately the block wasn't a big deal for them, we were just using it for automated status reporting rather than running an inhouse mailserver.)
Technically you are correct. That said, the public pricing is a useful bit of data for taking a guess at the actual costs. Given the assumption that SpaceX is meant to at least break even on each launch, this pricing data puts an upper bound on the actual launch costs. (At $5,359/kg to LEO.)
(Of course that assumption is a bit dicey, given that Elon Musk is a rich industrial idealist who is not apparently afraid to sink his personal fortune into radical projects. Still, he didn't get rich by being stupid with money, so it's not completely unreasonable as assumptions go.)
Another data point is the ISS resupply contract, which for SpaceX includes at least 12 flights for US$1.6 billion. That works out to US$133 million per flight, but includes not only Falcon 9 launchers and operations but also Dragon capsules and their operations. The stated Falcon 9 launch price of $56 million is about 42% of the contracted per-flight costs. It's easy for me (as an amateur observer) to believe that capsule procurement and operations would soak up around half of a per-flight budget.
The actual costs for SpaceX, however, do remain obscure. Given that SpaceX is a privately-held corporation, it's no surprise that actual launch cost data is held privately.
As for NASA's other options... what other options? The Falcon/Dragon stack Orbital Sciences also has a resupply contract, at US$1.9 billion for eight flights of its Taurus/Cygnus stack. The simple assumption is that SpaceX is cheaper than OSC, but that's without taking into account the per-flight payload mass delivered by each system.
SpaceX offers open and fixed pricing that is the same for all customers, including a best price guarantee. Modest discounts are available for contractually committed, multi-launch purchases. A half bay flight of Falcon 9 is available to accommodate customers with payloads in between Falcon 1 and 9. Mission Type Price* LEO (s/c80% capacity to the customer orbit) $56M GTO (s/c3,000 kg)** $49.9M GTO (s/c up to 4,680 kg) $56M
*Standard Launch Services Pricing through 12/31/10.
Standard prices assumes standard services (see User Guide) and payment in full within the noted calendar period.
Payments made over time subject to LIBOR +2.5% financing rate. Contact SpaceX for standard payment plan.
Standard price includes a SpaceX-developed and produced payload adapter and tension-band separation system. Other systems can be accommodated or provided — contact SpaceX for more information.
Reflight insurance offered at 8.0% of Standard Launch Services Price.
**SpaceX reserves the right to seek a non-interference co-passenger
Rebates to Standard Launch Services Pricing are considered on a case-by case basis to address (i) inaugural launches, (ii) short turn around opportunities and (iii) multiple launch service procurements.
Congratulations on getting your story accepted to the front page!
Dozens of man-hours will now be spent explaining basics of inhouse certificate authorities and self-signing, along with comments on your lack of basic research, intelligence, qualification for your position, and legitimate parentage.
Ticonderoga now has a cloud pencil service? Who knew?!
But seriously, part of any good security plan is business continuity in the event of disaster, such as a widespread multiday power outage. For a lot of places that means closing the doors for a while, but some industries (eg healthcare) can't count on that option. Paper recordkeeping is a very robust interim solution.
Assuming you remember to print out your emergency procedures and forms before the power goes out...
But you do apply the razor when evaluating whether or not someone is actively concealing data.
There were hundreds of thousands of digital cameras in range of this event, and there's not one image from another angle that clearly shows a rocket launch instead of an aircraft contrail which has been posted to flickr. Is it simpler to think that all such images have been suppressed, or that there simply never were any?
Regarding the motion, did you notice the rapid acceleration? The staging events? The motor burnout after a couple minutes?
No?
Well good, because they weren't there. These are all characteristics of big solid boosters. A shuttle SRB burns for around two minutes with no staging; a Trident for about 170 seconds, with two staging events. Any solid rocket will accelerate rapidly; it has more-or-less constant thrust while the vehicle mass drops quickly as its fuel is expended as exhaust.
The cameraman said he tracked this object for ten minutes. There is no solid booster anyone knows about that is big enough and slow enough to have been visible to him for that long.
Jobs totally dodged the open/closed issue. But his attempt to reframe the difference as fragmented/integrated is not just a good PR move for them, but a telling point. Apple's strength has always been as a system integrator, which brings substantial value to the ordinary user.
A lot more openness from them still would be nice, though.:-)
Older passwords are more likely to have leaked as a function of their age. But the benefit of changing them regularly may not outweigh the costs, as others have noted.
The author may be amplifying his poitnt a bit too far in a few places. In particular:
" 86 percent do not check for a secure connection when accessing sensitive information when using unfamiliar computers."
The problem is accessing sensitiveinformation AT ALL using unfamiliar computers. The little lock icon is irrelevant if the system has a keylogger.
" 14 percent never change their banking password."
With a strong enough password, changing it confers little advantage.
" And 30 percent remember their passwords by writing them down and hiding them somewhere like a desk drawer."
The problem is not so much writing them down, but hiding them in an insecure location. (The current threat environment for most people makes memorized weak passwords a larger risk than written strong passwords.) If people kept their password list stapled to five hundred-dollar bills, you can bet they'd keep it safe enough!
Slashdot Mirror
The company rushed to point out that security certifications from TRUSTe, McAfee and Norton are worthless in this situation.
True, but "a willing lawyer" isn't a tough standard to meet. :-)
Still - in all seriousness - it's hard to imagine a jury who wouldn't be on his side.
If his employer was tracking him, it must have been for work purposes, right? So since he was on the clock, he should at least be paid his contracted rate for all the time he was tracked.
"That sounds like a reasoned response. Got any research to back it up? Of course, for suitable research to actually be meaningful, it would probably require recognised experts in commerce and education. Might want a quick trip down to your local university to see if you can find some.
Oh, wait. You don't believe in them. Well, you just go ahead spouting unsupported statements."
Most amusing.
To treat your post seriously for a moment, you're overlooking a very substantial truth: Good science is arrived at by an open process, not by a university's stamp of certification. Recognized experts are entirely optional to good science.
I'll freely admit that I've done no studies; although salted with fact, what I wrote above is opinion not science. But there's nothing stopping someone from doing science on these questions, inside academia or out.
Hee-hee. That was just to build credibility with the academic crowd. :-p
Don't confuse anti-academicism with anti-intellectualism. People are just as interested in learning as they ever were, but the monopoly on higher education held by the university system for the last couple centuries is crumbling in the face of the freer exchange of ideas offered by the internet.
Universities are in the content delivery and certification business. They're suffering the same internet-related issues as other content delivery systems as other options become viable. (Khan Academy, anyone?) But worse for them, they've allowed their certification standards to steadily be weakened, while at the same time raising their prices far faster than inflation. Faced with paying ridiculous prices for weak degrees when free options abound, it's hardy surprising that many choose to opt out.
I had a customer (a small town government) recently have port 25 outbound blocked by Comcast. After going around with Comcast for a bit, it turned out that they were subscribed to a residential-class service, which has port 25 outbound blocked by an implacable policy. The only way to get the port unblocked in this case would have been to move them to a business-class service with a static IP. (Fortunately the block wasn't a big deal for them, we were just using it for automated status reporting rather than running an inhouse mailserver.)
I expect the most relevant age category for him is "old enough to buy alcohol".
Wow, some people are hard to please! :-)
Technically you are correct. That said, the public pricing is a useful bit of data for taking a guess at the actual costs. Given the assumption that SpaceX is meant to at least break even on each launch, this pricing data puts an upper bound on the actual launch costs. (At $5,359/kg to LEO.)
(Of course that assumption is a bit dicey, given that Elon Musk is a rich industrial idealist who is not apparently afraid to sink his personal fortune into radical projects. Still, he didn't get rich by being stupid with money, so it's not completely unreasonable as assumptions go.)
Another data point is the ISS resupply contract, which for SpaceX includes at least 12 flights for US$1.6 billion. That works out to US$133 million per flight, but includes not only Falcon 9 launchers and operations but also Dragon capsules and their operations. The stated Falcon 9 launch price of $56 million is about 42% of the contracted per-flight costs. It's easy for me (as an amateur observer) to believe that capsule procurement and operations would soak up around half of a per-flight budget.
The actual costs for SpaceX, however, do remain obscure. Given that SpaceX is a privately-held corporation, it's no surprise that actual launch cost data is held privately.
As for NASA's other options... what other options? The Falcon/Dragon stack Orbital Sciences also has a resupply contract, at US$1.9 billion for eight flights of its Taurus/Cygnus stack. The simple assumption is that SpaceX is cheaper than OSC, but that's without taking into account the per-flight payload mass delivered by each system.
Pricing
SpaceX offers open and fixed pricing that is the same for all customers, including a best price guarantee. Modest discounts are available for contractually committed, multi-launch purchases. A half bay flight of Falcon 9 is available to accommodate customers with payloads in between Falcon 1 and 9.
Mission Type Price*
LEO (s/c80% capacity to the customer orbit) $56M
GTO (s/c3,000 kg)** $49.9M
GTO (s/c up to 4,680 kg) $56M
*Standard Launch Services Pricing through 12/31/10.
Standard prices assumes standard services (see User Guide) and payment in full within the noted calendar period.
Payments made over time subject to LIBOR +2.5% financing rate. Contact SpaceX for standard payment plan.
Standard price includes a SpaceX-developed and produced payload adapter and tension-band separation system. Other systems can be accommodated or provided — contact SpaceX for more information.
Reflight insurance offered at 8.0% of Standard Launch Services Price.
**SpaceX reserves the right to seek a non-interference co-passenger
Rebates to Standard Launch Services Pricing are considered on a case-by case basis to address (i) inaugural launches, (ii) short turn around opportunities and (iii) multiple launch service procurements.
Performance
Launch Site: Cape Canaveral AFS Kwajalein
Mass to Low Earth Orbit (LEO): 10,450 kg (23,050 lb) 8,560 kg (18,870 lb)
Inclination: 28.5 degree 90 degree (polar orbit)
Mass to Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO): 4,540 kg (10,000 lb) 4,680 kg (10,320 lb)
Inclination: 28.5 degree 9.1 degree
For further information, contact us at FalconGuide@spacex.com.
Congratulations on getting your story accepted to the front page!
Dozens of man-hours will now be spent explaining basics of inhouse certificate authorities and self-signing, along with comments on your lack of basic research, intelligence, qualification for your position, and legitimate parentage.
Ticonderoga now has a cloud pencil service? Who knew?!
But seriously, part of any good security plan is business continuity in the event of disaster, such as a widespread multiday power outage. For a lot of places that means closing the doors for a while, but some industries (eg healthcare) can't count on that option. Paper recordkeeping is a very robust interim solution.
Assuming you remember to print out your emergency procedures and forms before the power goes out...
And when Joe Farmer runs his backhoe through your Fiber line? Send everyone home for the day? Tell your clients that their media is stuck on Amazon?
Easy! Just fall back on your emergency operations procedure (likely involving paper) until service is restored.
You do have an emergency ops procedure, right? /., at least? :-p )
(Or you will after another next ask
Now, Ron. Don't go making me wish I'd voted for you.
Oh, wait... Actually yes, please do!
It's amazing how much fun can be had just by turning pithy arguments inside-out. :-)
Note that I'm not against copyright, but against the abuse of copyright. That is, i think Lessig has it right.
Copyright law was not intended as a shield for those who censor, irrespective of the motive.
This appears to be a re-hash of Google Wave, which the big G already abandoned.
I love that magazine! It's like Slashdot, only with less fair use!
But you do apply the razor when evaluating whether or not someone is actively concealing data.
There were hundreds of thousands of digital cameras in range of this event, and there's not one image from another angle that clearly shows a rocket launch instead of an aircraft contrail which has been posted to flickr. Is it simpler to think that all such images have been suppressed, or that there simply never were any?
Regarding the motion, did you notice the rapid acceleration? The staging events? The motor burnout after a couple minutes?
No?
Well good, because they weren't there. These are all characteristics of big solid boosters. A shuttle SRB burns for around two minutes with no staging; a Trident for about 170 seconds, with two staging events. Any solid rocket will accelerate rapidly; it has more-or-less constant thrust while the vehicle mass drops quickly as its fuel is expended as exhaust.
The cameraman said he tracked this object for ten minutes. There is no solid booster anyone knows about that is big enough and slow enough to have been visible to him for that long.
... suppose all mobile devices that weren't iPhones had somewhat flaky Facebook integration, but iPhones "just worked" with Facebook.
But "just working" with Facebook is itself a bug.
Jobs totally dodged the open/closed issue. But his attempt to reframe the difference as fragmented/integrated is not just a good PR move for them, but a telling point. Apple's strength has always been as a system integrator, which brings substantial value to the ordinary user.
A lot more openness from them still would be nice, though. :-)
Older passwords are more likely to have leaked as a function of their age. But the benefit of changing them regularly may not outweigh the costs, as others have noted.
The author may be amplifying his poitnt a bit too far in a few places. In particular:
" 86 percent do not check for a secure connection when accessing sensitive information when using unfamiliar computers."
The problem is accessing sensitiveinformation AT ALL using unfamiliar computers. The little lock icon is irrelevant if the system has a keylogger.
" 14 percent never change their banking password."
With a strong enough password, changing it confers little advantage.
" And 30 percent remember their passwords by writing them down and hiding them somewhere like a desk drawer."
The problem is not so much writing them down, but hiding them in an insecure location. (The current threat environment for most people makes memorized weak passwords a larger risk than written strong passwords.) If people kept their password list stapled to five hundred-dollar bills, you can bet they'd keep it safe enough!
I guess you're REALLY gonna miss it then. :-p