Part of this perhaps comes from the way Moore's law is presented in introductory Information Systems classes at university business schools. (I'm currently teac

Part of this perhaps comes from the way Moore's law is presented in introductory Information Systems classes at university business schools. (I'm currently teaching one such.) As sad as it sounds, university freshmen/sophomores aren't as true to the cause/effect logic (including correlation != causation) typical of scientists, engineers, and other logically minded folks. We use Moore's law as an explanation of the growth of the past, which has led (according to the text) to the commoditization and near-zero cost of storage and bandwidth. We further make the simplifying assumption that Moore's Law will continue to hold, and then discuss its consequences on potential future endeavors. In other words, I think you're seeing "because of Moore's Law the future is such-and-such" as shorthand for "using the assumption that the pace of technological advancement predicted by Moore's Law continues to hold, the future may look like such-and-such." Yes, the language isn't as tight as those who thrive on specificity (e.g., programmers) might like, but that's perhaps a consequence of sharing these principles with every person in every discipline in the business school.