While I think this is a very important part of engineering well coordinated system, and pretty much any system, in general, the long term play is to remove the need for managing exceptions in code, in the same vein as the declarative programming push for LINQ
or other features focused on raising the level of abstraction. As George stated in the video, robots have a very apparent failure result, they just fall off a cliff or fail to complete thier task. It's the "Live" lock scenarios that have become so numerous
and pervasive as a result of poor software composability. Microsoft is definitely on the right track in addresing this in basically all areas of development right now by trying to raise the level of abstraction above the ground, where an updated concurrency
model (or any update) can be applied without disturbing the "Eloi". On the flip side, "Morlocks" want to move between both worlds if necessary (Anders talks about this alot), but the default experience should be (arguably) one of a declaritive nature when
it comes to writing programs. The entrepreneur is not concerned about a stack trace, just how to actualize the idea. I actually fall on the other side. I want to see all the dirty little details.
I really enjoyed this video, mainly because of George's passion for this subject. I was amazed to hear that writing games or doing robots was a preferred instructional path because of the way it teaches you fundamentals of concurrency and how to think in these
terms. It makes sense, and it made me open my mind a bit more. I should go pick a MS robotics kit and some Legos, all kidding aside.