Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ReddFro t1_it42s06 wrote

Neat, but if you’re trying to say we’ve been saying this same shit for 20 years, I’ll point out from reviewing your own article list that older stuff talks about Moore’s law ending “soon”, and newer stuff saying its already dead. In fact several of the older articles even point to right around now as the end (one from 2011 said early 2020’s, another in 2013 that it’s dead in about 10 years).

8

Fantastic-Climate-84 t1_it44stu wrote

They all really have the same theme.

“New tech isn’t as much of an improvement over last years model”.

The point I’m making is this article comes out every single year, saying the same thing as last years article. Sometimes it’s from CEOs that want to slow down how much they invest in r&d, sometimes it’s from investors prophesying the end of the growth of IT stocks, sometimes it’s the end users themselves.

Quantifiably, moors law has literally ended. The law pertained to the actual count of transistors on a chip, and how small we can make them. The “law” stated we would be doubling the count every — we’ll, it was first every four years, but we outpaced that so he adjusted — two years. That’s not the defining element to how we use tech any more, and chips are so small and with rapidly changing design and dynamics that it’s still, functionally, in place. We haven’t stagnated on transistor count, it’s still going up, but with varying ways of building the chips into the systems tech has in no way plateaued.

10

ReddFro t1_it5cih7 wrote

The way my brother states it is the new moore’s law is the number of ways moors law is defined doubles every 18 months.

6

Fantastic-Climate-84 t1_it5j7kz wrote

Love it, that sounds pretty accurate.

Honestly I look forward to next years article for the same argument and the same conversations about the same topic.

2