Personally though, I’ve watched the march of technology first hand, I’ve seen how this works and I see where there’s room for advancement.

…

Right…

My example:

But that assumption is the same as thinking a fallen object will keep gaining speed until it passes the speed of light

Is literally what you’re doing.

You were born and lived during a period the apple was increasing in velocity, you may have witnessed it fall from the tree, but probably not. But that apple is going to hit the ground, that’s the real limit for how small we can make a chip, we’re already at the point with ASML that we have to fuck with light waves and only a single Dutch company can make the machine.

Are there still gains?

Sure, but the days of doubling is over, Moores law is dead.

It’s a direct analogy to the speed of light, something can double in speed every year for a very long time. But eventually it’ll stop being able to and will increase in speed at a barely perceptible level, never beating light speed.

Like, this is an insanely basic concept, and you’re entire opposition is:

You don’t understand, this has always happened for the last few decades I’ve paid attention so it’ll always keep happening

Which is just completely illogical. And I’m not going to keep wasting time on people like you