> let's just assume they mean the same thing and move to more interesting discussions They don't mean the same thing, and that is a poisonous attitude to have.

> let's just assume they mean the same thing and move to more interesting discussions They don't mean the same thing, and that is a poisonous attitude to have. Parallelism is about performance. Concurrency is about synchronization. The difference might not matter to you, but for certain things (programming language design, library design, system architecture) it is paramount. One thing nearly everyone agrees on: a single-core processor cannot do parallelism, but it's perfectly capable of concurrency. How do you reconcile that with your view that they are the same?