|
Not sure about the HW simulator, but why can you not debug all instances in a single VS? Is it a lack of resources on your system that prevents you loading everything into a single VS instance?
The new VS 2022 is 64 bit, and can handle a large app memory footprint. And while I haven't tried it, it can supposedly work across multiple repositories for the same solution at the same time too.
|
|
|
|
|
We're using VS2019. Part of the debugging and testing requires each of the separate processes to exit and restart with the others running. There doesn't appear to be any way to "stop debugging" on an individual process, even using the Debug Processes window. You can detach from a process, kill it with Task Manager, start it again outside Studio, and then attach to it, but that's really cumbersome.
The workflow is just simpler running everything in separate instances.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
|
He has a metric ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) ton of metric :elphant:tons of money. Whatever he does, he wins.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
As do every other billionaire and their cronies. Most of them want to restrict what you do and expand what they do. In either case you don't have freedom or choice. They fund all these messages to say you shouldn't fly and then own their own jets. They say you should minimize, and they buy multiple houses on beach front property around the world.
|
|
|
|
|
It's about a 20% premium to yesterday's close but is predicated on financing and regulatory approval. I think the latter will be a challenge. The excuse will be that it shouldn't be private, but the true reason will be that they don't want the censorship to end.
|
|
|
|
|
Go to the head of the class! Continued censorship of 'other' speech is the goal.
|
|
|
|
|
Except his wealth isn't a sign of his success or his smarts -- it is a sign of his lack of humanity.
And the ONLY way you can view it as "winning" is from a sociopathic point of view.
What YOU are doing is called "Simping for Capatilists" (look it up).
|
|
|
|
|
Don't forget that most of Musk's wealth is in stock, which while relatively easily converted to cash via sales, will result in taxes and potential stock price drops. I don't think there'll be a Tesla stock price drop from this because Musk has said why he's selling, but at least one investment bank will panic and sell, thereby losing money that they'll attempt to blame Musk for (it's happened before).
|
|
|
|
|
Smart Rich People (Gates) do NOT sell their stock easily.
Instead, they borrow against it, which has ZERO tax implications, and usually gives them an INSANELY good rate, since the loan is guaranteed.
In Gates Case, this is how he built his house. And I believe he waited for the price of MSFT to quadruple from when he took the loan out. Then he sold. Paid half in taxes, and the other half, paid off the loan. he bought the house, effectively for the interest he paid.
Money... When you have a enough of it, is an amazing thing. And generally, Rich people defer and defray taxes far better than the middle class. Who absorbs them. (Would you spend $800k up front and $200k/yr to SHELTER your income taxes? Not if you make what a developer makes! But if you made MILLIONS a year. Heck Yeah!)
|
|
|
|
|
Wealth is not a sign of lack of humanity. Musk is something of a corporate welfare queen, but he's also an innovator. If only we had capitalism, instead of what is primarily corporatism (the symbiotic relationship between government and big business).
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: Wealth is not a sign of lack of humanity.
No, not directly a sign, but the latter is often used to drive the former, so that should not be denied either. There is enough of a correlation for me that I want to see proof of humanity first before I will find the subject worthy of praise.
In order to make it to the top without being a snake in a suit, you really have to be clever and quick, and I won't deny Musk has both in some fields, but that still does not prove he isn't a snake also. The truth is, I just don't know.
There is no need for me to hold him in any kind of special high regard. I still have "don't look up" echoing somewhere on my retina.
|
|
|
|
|
Dehumanizing the wealthy as predatory criminals is a nice way to set up for a purge, isn't it?
Most of us have seen this play already and we know how it ends.
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen this discussion trick already.
Just don't put words in my mouth, ok? And, now that we're at it, don't pretend that you didn't try it ..
|
|
|
|
|
You asked for proof of humanity.
Elon Musk has to prove his humanity to you?
|
|
|
|
|
"to hold him in any kind of special high regard" I wrote. Don't leave that out.
|
|
|
|
|
That doesn't change the message.
He still has to prove his humanity - which is something that should be granted.
My guess is you meant: He has to demonstrate some sort of moral fibre.
If that is the case then we're in agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I could not disagree with you more.
Socialism, and Communism died a long time ago. (Think Russia)
Elon Musk has succeeded in a very demanding and and cut-throat environment.
Do you feel the same way about Bill Gates? Or Steve Jobs?
Wealth is attained by providing goods and services that people want, and need.
Those guys worked hard and took risks that most people on this earth would not.
Adam Smith's "Supply and Demand" isn't just a good idea, it's the law.
I know you are entitled to your opinion, but so am I, and this is mine.
I do wish you well.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
Im curious to see what elon does with twitter, if he is allowed to purchase it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slow Eddie wrote: Wealth is attained by providing goods and services that people want, and need.
Those guys worked hard and took risks that most people on this earth would not.
With all due respect, but that's a very naive point of view.
A whole lot of people work hard and take risks, yet only very few of them are this disproportionately rich.
People like Bezos, Musk and Gates are this wealthy because of luck, being at the right place at the right time, possibly with the right product.
I'm not saying they didn't work hard, and you can enforce luck to some extent, but luck is still a huge factor.
And then when they get that lucky break, and the money comes rolling in, there's no stopping it.
These companies buy out their competition, have the best lawyers, pay relatively few tax, are so ingrained in every day life it's nearly impossible to fight them (or not use them, for that matter)...
People who say "just don't use Facebook" are probably unaware that even if they don't have a FB account, FB is still harvesting their data because every website with a FB like/share-button is sharing their browser- and usage data with FB.
Yes, they are that powerful and omnipresent, you can't not-use them.
As for "lack of humanity", Musk threatened to close an entire factory, making hundreds of people jobless, because he didn't like the state's (temporary) COVID rules (I don't know if he ultimately did it).
The richest person on earth, Bezos, is paying his employees the minimum of the minimum while conditions wouldn't even be legal in most of Europe.
Steve Jobs was known for being a real a**hole.
None of them have any difficulty with moving production to China for the lowest possible wages and the worst conditions.
Meanwhile their huge hunger for even more of our (often illegally gotten, sold or traded) data is slowly killing off the planet with their huge data centers.
The petrochemical industry is even worse, they've actively hidden reports that showed them they were killing the planet for decades.
The rich pharmaceuticals have more than once been compared to maffia, and not because they are such good and hard working people.
Your supply and demand is also not that simple.
For example, there's a huge demand for healthcare workers and teachers, yet they won't earn as much as an average IT consultant.
There's now a huge demand for houses and prices go up, yet after WWII there was an equal demand for houses, but prices didn't go up simply because people couldn't afford them if they did.
You are entitled to your opinion, but I find it a dangerous one, because if we can't call out these people and companies for what they are, lucky and evil to some extent, we can't fight them and we can't make this world a better place.
|
|
|
|
|
Well written generic response. Yes, luck is always a factor, that goes for every single person on earth.
But let's get specific:
How many companies / competitors did Musk buy?
Did he work his butt off and take risks very few others would have, including putting his entire net worth into companies like SpaceX and Tesla, which both came very close to bankruptcy?
Did he work at least as long hours as his employees? By all reports, he doesn't have much of a personal life.
You obviously haven't done much research, because Tesla didn't close the Fremont factory. Instead, they have expanded it to the point where it's producing way more than it ever did under GM or Toyota.
As for moving production to China, yes, he built a factory in Shanghai. But you will note that it does not export back to the USA, and is only exporting some production to Europe until the German factory is in full production. It's friendlier for the environment and probably better for business (if done efficiently) to produce locally where the goods are going to be sold.
Similarly, the new Texas factory will be selling to the eastern US.
By all reports, all of those factories are some of the best designed and run in the world. While there are obviously some disgruntled ex-employees, Tesla and SpaceX also seem to retain the loyalty and enthusiasm of a lot of their employees, unlike, for example, Amazon.
As for net worth, this has effectively been 'voted' to them by their investors, and allowed/encouraged by the elected officials of the land.
If you have an issue with that, there is an obvious remedy. Change the government.
|
|
|
|
|
This same dynamic played out during the Russian Revolution.
The basic premise is that any person in power or who had money was by necessity evil.
People were placed in the gulag for the crime of having employed other people.
That isn't an exaggeration or a joke - paying someone else a salary made you a criminal.
Because of that premise the entire power structure in Russia had to be replaced via revolution.
So the person you're trying to refute is using the same premise.
The rich are inherently corrupt.
You'll get nowhere in the discussion with this person because they hold that as a statement of faith.
The idiocy of that position is that somehow government officials (State of California) cannot be corrupt even though they are rich and powerful. So the expectation is that Elon Musk bend over and take it up the backside and not protest in any way despite what whack-a-doodle policies come down from Sacramento.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not that the rich are inherently corrupt or evil, it's just that in order to get that rich you usually have to be pretty relentless and such money is almost always made over the backs of other people.
You could say that's just business as usual, or that some of those rich companies offer great products and/or services while also treating their employees pretty well.
But even if such a rich person is a paragon of pure justice, no person should be able to wield so much money (and the power that comes with it).
I simply think it's not good for society as a whole.
The society could use that money, Elon Musk, at this point, cannot.
He has so much money he can't even spend it all, ever (I realize he doesn't have all that money on his bank account, but in stock options).
Meanwhile, he pays a relative low percentage of tax (which is unfair on it's own).
Right now, he doesn't like Twitter (neither do I, mind you) and he has the money and power to outright buy it and do with it as he wishes.
That's what all these companies do, buy the competition, or anything they don't like, and shut it down or integrate it in their own business model.
That's not democratic or capitalist (read, fair market competition), it's much closer to communism where one party owns everything (I'm speaking in American terms here, us Europeans are much less concerned about capitalist vs. communism).
For example, at this point, you're kind of an outsider if you're not on social media (Facebook, Instagram and/or WhatsApp).
Especially in the Netherlands, it's difficult to live without WhatsApp, it's everywhere.
Friends communicate through WhatsApp, parties are planned on WhatsApp, invites are send on WhatsApp, even payments are requested through WhatsApp.
You can simply dismiss such claims by saying "just don't create an account", but us people really want to belong and these tools make that possible.
You'd have to have a very strong personality or beliefs not to make an account on any of these platforms.
And all are owned by Facebook.
Ergo, to belong to a group, or even society as a whole, you have to sell your data to Facebook, you don't really have a choice.
And even if you don't, Facebook is harvesting your data anyway because every website that has a Facebook share button (which is pretty much every website, including CP) sends your data to Facebook.
You just can't not-use Facebook!
And as Zuck has proven times and again, he really can't be trusted with our data.
The guy should be in jail after all the Facebook scandals, but because he's filthy rich he can afford the best lawyers and buy his way out.
The fines don't even hurt him or Facebook because they make so much money we can't even imagine it.
The same goes for Apple, Google, Microsoft and Amazon (Amazon isn't that big in The Netherlands), and all other really large and rich companies for that matter (oil, pharmacy, etc.).
Now you tell me, is that fair? Is that righteous? Could there be a ring of truth to "big companies are evil"?
Amazon treats and pays its employees like crap while their boss is the richest person on the planet (richer than entire countries!).
People say "just don't work for Amazon", but people need jobs and Amazon provides.
1 out of every 153 employed people works for Amazon, that makes Amazon incredibly powerful and when people massively choose not to work for Amazon the American economy will probably collapse or at least see a steep fall.
So you see, these people don't choose to work for Amazon, they choose not to be unemployed so they can at least put food on the table.
That's how powerful a company or even a person can be.
I don't have a clear solution, but we really can't solve the problem until people recognize and acknowledge it's a problem at all (even if it's a completely legal situation, mind you).
It may not be evil or corrupt, but it's still a situation we shouldn't want to be in.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
