> I don't think you fully grasped what I was implying. I understood you. This example doesn't illustrate the same concept. You're talking about allowing RPC in

> I don't think you fully grasped what I was implying. I understood you. This example doesn't illustrate the same concept. You're talking about allowing RPC into a running program. The talk is about RPC to your IDE as you develop the program. These are very different situations. The colloquialism "thinking about security at every level" doesn't mean that shipping a program on air-gapped faraday-caged hardware is the only security. Any machine running a website can have the program modified by changing the HTML (or HTML generating code) at any time. Ruby, PHP, Perl, or even Tomcat (which will reload artifacts in realtime, without some tweaks) are hobbled versions of the same concept. Elixir/Erlang and LISP coding (et al) is live coding due to the nature of the runtime. This idea of having an interactive program, as you develop, does not preclude a hardened artifact (which has never been the problem, since swapping out a replacement that's hardened would make that pointless) but that's partly the point. Making new toys and features, the talk is about the important elements to keep focusing on and why to move development forward.