[nordsieck]

> I mean isn't this a major marketing fraud?

This isn't marketing fraud because you aren't being sold transisters like you buy lumber at Home Depot.

Instead, you buy working chips with certain properties whose process has a name "10 nm" or "7 nm". Intel et. al. have rationalizations for why certain process nodes are named in certain ways; that's enough.

[gruez]

>This isn't marketing fraud because you aren't being sold transisters like you buy lumber at Home Depot.

Funny you say that, because "two by fours" used to be 2" x 4”, but became progressively thinner as manufacturing processes improved.

[nimajneb]

I thought it was because they planed the wood for you, a 2x4 is 2x4 before kiln drying and planing. https://www.thesprucecrafts.com/why-isnt-a-2x4-a-2x4-3970461

That said I'm not sure why they don't sell it by it's actual size.

[gruez]

>However, even the dimensions for finished lumber of a given nominal size have changed over time. In 1910, a typical finished 1-inch (25 mm) board was 13⁄16 in (21 mm). In 1928, that was reduced by 4%, and yet again by 4% in 1956. In 1961, at a meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona, the Committee on Grade Simplification and Standardization agreed to what is now the current U.S. standard: in part, the dressed size of a 1-inch (nominal) board was fixed at 3⁄4 inch; while the dressed size of 2 inch (nominal) lumber was reduced from 1 5⁄8 inch to the current 1 1⁄2 inch.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumber#Dimensional_lumber

[lttlrck]

Despite the change from unfinished rough cut to more dimensionally stable, dried and finished lumber, the sizes are at least standardized by NIST. Still a funny observation!