Oh, I agree 100%. I was just as confused as he was when I first started using Go, and I'm very excited that this change might finally happen. However, I think

Oh, I agree 100%. I was just as confused as he was when I first started using Go, and I'm very excited that this change might finally happen. However, I think calling my response "technically true" is selling Go's concurrency primitives a little short. They enable a really great programming model, which makes it much easier to express certain ideas in code. And I/O-bound programs benefit even if GOMAXPROCS=1. I didn't understand that subtlety when I first started with Go, and it seems like GP commenter (and probably other HN readers) didn't either. "Concurrency is not parallelism" is very helpful in explaining that, which is why I linked to it.