3 ms·

Who is it deceiving? It sounds like the only people who get “tricked” are laypersons; professionals do not.

gpm 4y ago
Since when is it acceptable to trick laypeople, especially when laypeople are buying products with the false advertising (cpus...)?
- dymk 4y ago
  2x4 lumber.
- moooo99 4y ago
  > Since when is it acceptable to trick laypeople, especially when laypeople are buying products with the false advertising (cpus...)? This is such a HN issue. It's not tricking people because the vast majority of layman don't even care about node size, gate size or the manufacturing process. The number of times I have encountered a person outside of a tech bubble that cared about the manufacturing process of a CPU is exactly zero. What people do care about: does it work, is it fast, is it efficient and can I afford it. At least for performance and efficiency the marketing term does give a somewhat reliable indication of the generational gains.
projektfu 4y ago
Investors. Even more sophisticated investors can be bamboozled by various claims. Because investors are usually trying to pick the future winners, they need these things as proxies to determine who is actually going to have the faster chips, or the lower costs, etc. Analysts are often not from the exact line of business. They may have a bachelor's in engineering, or something, but they're usually not domain experts beyond having studied the field from a business perspective and gotten used to its lingo. So, these things can be kind of manipulative. That said, it's par for the course. It's better than outright lying and bribing the analysts like in the 2000-2002 telecom bust.
- bee_rider 4y ago
  If somebody has a bachelor's in EE and thinks the nm marketing value is an actual measurement they should see about getting a refund.
  - orangepurple 4y ago
    Investors talk about AI as if it is a real thing. Before that it was big data.
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      Colloquially lots of successful technologies have been referred to as "AI" and so it doesn't seem that unreasonable that investors could look into that kind of stuff. On the other hand, if somebody's investing strategy assumes, like, artificial general intelligence is coming soon -- investing involves risk and investing while stupid involves disproportionate risk I guess.

gpm 4y ago

Since when is it acceptable to trick laypeople, especially when laypeople are buying products with the false advertising (cpus...)?

dymk 4y ago
2x4 lumber.
moooo99 4y ago
> Since when is it acceptable to trick laypeople, especially when laypeople are buying products with the false advertising (cpus...)? This is such a HN issue. It's not tricking people because the vast majority of layman don't even care about node size, gate size or the manufacturing process. The number of times I have encountered a person outside of a tech bubble that cared about the manufacturing process of a CPU is exactly zero. What people do care about: does it work, is it fast, is it efficient and can I afford it. At least for performance and efficiency the marketing term does give a somewhat reliable indication of the generational gains.

projektfu 4y ago

Investors. Even more sophisticated investors can be bamboozled by various claims. Because investors are usually trying to pick the future winners, they need these things as proxies to determine who is actually going to have the faster chips, or the lower costs, etc. Analysts are often not from the exact line of business. They may have a bachelor's in engineering, or something, but they're usually not domain experts beyond having studied the field from a business perspective and gotten used to its lingo. So, these things can be kind of manipulative. That said, it's par for the course. It's better than outright lying and bribing the analysts like in the 2000-2002 telecom bust.

bee_rider 4y ago
If somebody has a bachelor's in EE and thinks the nm marketing value is an actual measurement they should see about getting a refund.
- orangepurple 4y ago
  Investors talk about AI as if it is a real thing. Before that it was big data.
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    Colloquially lots of successful technologies have been referred to as "AI" and so it doesn't seem that unreasonable that investors could look into that kind of stuff. On the other hand, if somebody's investing strategy assumes, like, artificial general intelligence is coming soon -- investing involves risk and investing while stupid involves disproportionate risk I guess.