>>14
Multicore chips have shared cache. That's way more useful than multiprocessing.
I can't tell if you're being serious or are trying to troll. Assuming you're not trolling. shared cache between CPUs isn't the same thing as being able to access the same physical memory concurrently, which is in fact possible to do with multiprocessing by mapping the same physical memory pages into each process's address space.
But perhaps you were more getting at the idea of multiprocessing, as in running multiple processes, isn't as good at fine-grained parallelism as is say task-oriented parallelism operating exclusively within a shared memory environment.
You know how it's fun to laugh at people who say one day we can talk to compilers in English and get programs?
I agree, the idea of being able to implement Flow seems distant, perhaps it won't be entirely achievable for a human programming language.
However, back to the point you made. It'll happen one day, perhaps within our lifetimes even, where we can just ask a compiler to build us a program using English. Only the compilers won't be compilers anymore, they'll be artificial general intelligences capable of feats far surpassing your typical human programmer.