what's the point of FP if processors are still Von Neumann?

You are shooting yourself in the foot by thinking in a manner inconsistent with the computer.

>>30
Haskell is proof that even PhDs completely misunderstood what he wrote about.

The creation of Haskell-like languages had nothing to do with Backus's FP at all. They just rode the hype. The languages that led to Haskell existed before he wrote that paper.

In the paper, he contrasts FP with ``lambda-calculus based systems'', which you would know if you ever actually read it.