http://www.wordyard.com/2007/09/24/moores-law-2/ Technology, politics, culture Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:26:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://www.wordyard.com/2007/09/24/moores-law-2/#comment-1043 Scott Rosenberg Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:18:55 +0000 http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1392#comment-1043 I agree. But in lieu of that there is, and has been for a long time,<a href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/bios/moore.htm" rel="nofollow">"official bio" info</a> on the Intel site that confirms the "First I said double every year, then I said double every 2 years" version, so I think it's as close to authoritative as we're gonna get. Presumably as the company founder he had some direct involvement in reviewing the information on the Intel site! It's also the first hit on google for "Gordon Moore Moore's Law" so it's pretty accessible. Which makes it remarkable how often the 18-month misinfo still gets recirculated... I agree. But in lieu of that there is, and has been for a long time,“official bio” info on the Intel site that confirms the “First I said double every year, then I said double every 2 years” version, so I think it’s as close to authoritative as we’re gonna get. Presumably as the company founder he had some direct involvement in reviewing the information on the Intel site! It’s also the first hit on google for “Gordon Moore Moore’s Law” so it’s pretty accessible. Which makes it remarkable how often the 18-month misinfo still gets recirculated…

]]> http://www.wordyard.com/2007/09/24/moores-law-2/#comment-1044 jeff jarvis Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:59:25 +0000 http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1392#comment-1044 It'd help if Moore had a blog post ranting about this and we all linked to THAT. then we'd have no doubt that he is the definitive source and we'd all find it. maybe that's a reason for authorship. It’d help if Moore had a blog post ranting about this and we all linked to THAT. then we’d have no doubt that he is the definitive source and we’d all find it. maybe that’s a reason for authorship.

]]>