[abetusk]

Moore's law might be dead but the deeper law is still alive.

Moore's law is technically "the number of transistors per unit area doubles every 24 months" [1]. The more important law is that the cost of transistors halves every 18-24 months.

That is, Moore's law talks about how many transistors we can pack into a unit area. The deeper issue is how much it costs. If we can only pack in a certain amount transistors per area but the cost drops exponentially, we still see massive gains.

There's also Wright's law that comes into play [3] that talks about dropping exponential costs just from institutional knowledge (2x in production leads to (.75-.9)x in cost).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb2tebYAaOA

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_curve_effects

[aszen]

Agreed the cost aspect of Moore's law may continue to remain true, especially with chiplets with varying fab nodes and 3d architectures. Wright's law will also bring down costs as lower nm nodes mature.

But as mentioned in the comments below ai model training is increasing exponentially (compute required to train models has been doubling every 3.6 months) so it still far outstrips the cost savings.

[edjrage]

It really irks me that these things are called "laws". A law is something we expect to hold true forever, by means of the hypothetico-deductive scientific method.

They're phenomena. They're patterns we observe, and that's it. The pattern may change anytime, and that's something that should be expected. The causes may be known or unknown, but to call it a law may even make it hold true for longer, for "psychological" reasons. The law of gravity isn't influenced by what SpaceX investors think about it.