> Also, RISC vs CISC is for people stuck in the 80s. Sometimes I joke on this topic to the akin of Indo-European languages vs Sino-Tibetan languages, or in lay

> Also, RISC vs CISC is for people stuck in the 80s. Sometimes I joke on this topic to the akin of Indo-European languages vs Sino-Tibetan languages, or in layman's term but a little offensive [1], English vs Chinese. This analogy is quite intriguing to me, since English is relatively easier than Chinese, and Chinese has more entropy than English, like RISC is much simpler than CISC, while CISC does more in one instruction than RISC in general. Of course, the true holy grail would be VLIW, which is like Esperanto, barely anyone knows and uses. But as I can speak both languages and recognize the difference between both ISA designs I don't really think it mattered, but there will always be some stubborn people who bitch about it. This kind of behavior sometimes lead me to think about Linguistic relativity [2] and even extend the whole argue into the highly political topic of Linguistic determinism [3]. [1]: there are couple more of those Indo-European and Sino-Tibetan languages. Deutsch is an obvious candidate. [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity. aka "what you speak could have affected what you thought" [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism. aka "what you speak affects what you thought"