There's another point, however. Moore's law is the basic premise around which a lot of the economy is now built. We design systems and software knowing that a p

There's another point, however. Moore's law is the basic premise around which a lot of the economy is now built. We design systems and software knowing that a predictable efficiency will be gained in X months. This is important to both back end and front end compute. For example, when the largest data centers in the world (e.g. Amazon) roll in a new series of hardware, we expect that the cost of X resources should be cheaper in 12 months compared to today. On the front end, as we figure out what makes a phone more "sticky" we expect that battery life must continue to increase, despite the fact that the device is now always listening, always recording our steps and activity, in constant contact with a radio base station thousands of feet away, and has the same number of pixels as an HDTV, which itself is now obsolete when compared to 4K displays. One of the points of the original article is that this continued increase in efficiency can continue (and therefore the Intel business model can continue to be viable). They're having no to throw a supercomputer at the problem, among other things, however.