The kernel debugger, ntsd and windbg share a debugging engine, and visual studio is a different one.
At higher levels, VS is a much nicer experience. If you ever need to get down to lower levels, especially windows libraries and services, the power of the ntsd/windbg engine and its extensions make it much more useful. Knowing it also helps when you eventually need to use KD.
That is itself a major issue with many American cities. There doesn't seem to be a way to force amalgamation, leaving the core city to handle more of the cost, and increasing the difficulty and overhead of regional infrastructure like public transit.
Almost everything about the plan to go to Mars, especially about creating a "backup population" is uncertain. Compare that to the current, immediate suffering and lost potential that is caused by poverty and disease.
Polio is an occurrence with a probability of one, and a non-zero impact.
An catastrophic asteroid impact is a low daily probability, with an impact of up to one (one being complete wipeout of the human race).
I think it's a tossup which yields better happiness or productivity for humanity to address in the short run. In the extreme long run, of course, if you don't solve the second, there's little point solving the first issue.
The problem is a lack of resources - that resource being some collective focus of humankind, as there's no real physical resource limit preventing us from pursuing both at the moment.
Why Mars? The moon is nearer and no less hospitable (frankly they both suck).
Mars is a vanity project however he chooses to dress it up. An interesting vanity project sure but a vanity project all the same.
And personally I have no issue with that, I just wish he'd be honest. We didn't go to the moon the first time for any good reason, we did it because it was there. Governments can't afford to pay for the "because they're there" projects any more but if Musk, Page and co can then great but don't pretend it's for the good of humanity - "because it's there" is all the justification you need for something that amazing.
The cynic in me says we went to the moon because putting a man on the moon made real the capability of getting an ICBM to anywhere on the earth - both to ourselves and the rest of the world. The optimist in me hopes we can setup shop somewhere, anywhere off-planet without similar motivations prodding us.
As the probability of the asteroid problem is low short term we should tackle the poverty problem first. Then we will have more people to tackle the asteroid problem in the long run.
If number of people are not the limiting factor to working on both problems, why would one a) impose a condition to work on the problems in a sequential order, and b) prefer an order based on gaining more people first?
That's a bit of a negative way to look at it. I think in the end the goals don't have to be mutually exclusive. Elon Musk does what he does best, and Gates does his thing.
They're both great goals and I'm glad we live in a time when going to mars is something we can propose as a serious point of discussion, instead of being an unrealistic dream.
Some people may have said this before Polio vaccine was discovered:
"Almost everything about the plan to help Polio victims, especially about creating a "polio vaccine" is uncertain. Compare that to the current, immediate suffering and lost potential that is caused by poverty and disease."
Polio is a disease that that's causing immediate suffering and lost potential. And it was even more so before discovery of the vaccine, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
The only specific alleviation that colonizing Mars yields is that people who don't want to live on Earth don't have to live on Earth.
There are some very good reasons to pursue the colonization of Mars, mostly in the form of advancing science. A backup population is not one of these good reasons.
Curing polio is a force multiplier that will probably help us get to Mars, in the form of more demand for satellites and space related industries, as well more inventors and scientists.
Colonizing Mars will be a force mulitpler as well, mostly through indirect technology benefit and ancillary space industries(asteroid mining). It probably won't impact the effort to cure polio but will probably increase our ability to cure other diseases.
It could be that YouTube videos are the cesspool of the internet and that adding google+ to them isn't a solution to this, just an excuse to try and increase the adoption of google+.
There isn't anything wrong with thinking that YouTube comments are often terrible while also disliking that google is trying to push their own social integration into all of the their services.
All of the detailed views in Google Maps are actually aerial photography rather than satellite images. Much easier to get that kind of detail from 1500ft.
That seems like a reasonable use for a $250 computer, but using a $1300 computer with a 2560x1700 display as a dumb terminal is a bit of a waste.
Your average end-user is going to be pretty disappointed when they find out that all they can do with their expensive laptop is browse the internet.
It seems like the best use of this of this might be to run Linux, but if you accept a slightly lower resolution, you can get a pretty decent Thinkpad or Envy that has a lot more flexibility.
Paying an extra thousand dollars for a much improved experience of a device that you'll look at 5-10 hours a day for several years, doesn't seem to me to be out of line, even if it does act as a dumb terminal.
> So why wouldn't you spend the few hundred more and get a MacBook Pro that isn't a dumb terminal ?
Chrome (both the browser and ChromeOS) have always been about making it so that "browser" and "dumb terminal" aren't at all the same thing. Certainly, I think its reasonable to say that its still at the point where, for many power users, it isn't suitable as a replacement for a traditional desktop OS.
But then, this is clearly aimed at early adopters that are more heavily into web-based tools than is generally the case, and who value a low-configuration means of getting to those tools.
He/she may have come off as abusive. But I think that's actually a good question.
Yes, the resolution is great. But why would someone spend 1300 bucks on something that has great resolution just so they can ssh into something else? $500 maybe.
Whoever down-voted you was a dick, there's still more decent folk than dicks though, just ignore it. And, have some karma back, good point for discussion above.
Paying an extra thousand dollars for a much improved experience of a device that you'll look at 5-10 hours a day for several years, doesn't seem to me to be out of line, even if it does act as a dumb terminal.
The real answer is: depends on what $1000 means to you.
Well remember that the car "lost" 60 miles of range overnight. If the Tesla people told him that charging it for a bit would restore the range it is conceivable that he would think that the whole 60 miles would come back. Remember that not everyone has a detailed understanding of how cold temperatures affect lithium ion batteries.
At higher levels, VS is a much nicer experience. If you ever need to get down to lower levels, especially windows libraries and services, the power of the ntsd/windbg engine and its extensions make it much more useful. Knowing it also helps when you eventually need to use KD.