I appreciate the interview you did. I found it enlightening, and watching and listening the whole clip increased my knowledge and understanding on programming i

I appreciate the interview you did. I found it enlightening, and watching and listening the whole clip increased my knowledge and understanding on programming in general, as well as on functional languages and the background of Erlang and Haskell. The second question ("Haskell and Erlang have 2 distinct models of concurrency, right? Haskell is going to side-effect free, Erlang is about messaging. Can you talk a bit about this in contrast to both models of concurrency?") was especially interesting to me. I'm not experienced with functional programming, and I'm interested in the unique characteristics of Haskell and Erlang. This question directed Armstrong's and Jones' discussion towards the differences in the languages, even though they did not clearly answer to the question. For the sake of feedback, the question starting with "Yes. This is in sync with how things happen, but sometimes it gets out of sync. It's the same thing with when you are dealing with processors"(...) was a bit hard to grasp. The mental models related each programming languages are interesting, but your question directed the discussion away from the issue of mental models. Perhaps asking "what do you see as the mental models of Haskell and Erlang" would have done the job? Anyway, thanks for the interview, it was beneficial to me, and I'm surely not the only one.