Are we there yet

 This talks about something that I have been wondering and I think I had even mentioned it in some other blog post, about how the world is nowadays hard dominated by the Object Oriented languages and how they do not have blatant differences, sure the have a lot of dissimilar things but nothing too important, a different implementation of this a different implementation of that end of line, parenthesis, brackets space agnostic, etc. It basically all comes down to little personalization for some niche of people with the way they like to do things, the people take it and in most cases never drop it, getting accustomed to it, and there is never a change to the core structure of how things are imagined and how you pose it.

He explains that the objects shouldn't be the building block over which we program, function should the ones that take that place, because objects are flawed as the description of the real world, they are easy to understand and it is a way in which we see the world that’s why we use them but they are not how the world works,things are not mutable in reality just as a concept and this flawed perception of the world is what made us introduce locks trying to make it work but inside a bad framework, he cites that two man can never pass the same river, that stayed with me and after that he developed it into a concept of time and how the time should derived from the past, taking the past (pure functions) and derive the future from it, in that way we do not need synchronization, we do not have to disturb or impede prior values in the creation of the successor, reduce the complexity since you are not dealing with concurrency anymore.