In 1964, Gordon E. Moore, research manager of Fairchild Semiconductor, observed a regular periodic doubling of the number of gates” (a measure of complexity), and claimed, by extrapolation, that this would continue. This prediction has come true so beautifully, that nowadays we speak of “Moore’s Law,” as if it were a law of Nature. The validity of this law cannot be understood from the technical procedures by which the chips are made. The fact that the law holds so well is an effect of the way actors (in industry, in science and in government) judge their own and each others’ accomplishments with respect to Moore’s Law predicts. They direct their efforts towards achieving the predicted values. Laboratories evaluate and plan their efforts in terms of Moore’s Law; when there is danger of specifications falling short at the predicted moment, extra effort is expended. Firms use the law to guide investment decisions in specific technologies; for example whether or not to develop products that need chips with the predicted capacity – such as calculators or compact disc players. Governments are willing to provide subsidies in order to help firms avert the danger of not meeting the predicted value. All actors exert themselves to measure up to the predicted competition and to stay in the race. Moore’s Law is the yardstick for the behavior of chip producers and governments in Japan, the United States and Europe, and it shapes their mutual dependency in the strategic game they play with one another.
Getting New Technologies Together: Studies in Making Sociotechnical Order
edited by Cornelis Disco and Barend van der Meulen
___________________________________________________
Chapter 7
Expectations in technological developments: An example of prospective structures to be filled in by agency
by Harro van Lente and Arie Rip
3 Some Examples of Emerging Patterns in Technology
A Example 1: Moore’s Law as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
The first example is about the development of memory chips, and involves all the large microelectronic firms in Japan, Europe and the United States. In 1964, Gordon E. Moore, research manager of Fairchild Semiconductor, observed a regular periodic doubling of the number of gates” (a measure of complexity), and claimed, by extrapolation, that this would continue. This prediction has come true so beautifully, that nowadays we speak of “Moore’s Law,” as if it were a law of Nature. The validity of this law cannot be understood from the technical procedures by which the chips are made. The fact that the law holds so well is an effect of the way actors (in industry, in science and in government) judge their own and each others’ accomplishments with respect to Moore’s Law predicts. They direct their efforts towards achieving the predicted values. Laboratories evaluate and plan their efforts in terms of Moore’s Law; when there is danger of specifications falling short at the predicted moment, extra effort is expended. Firms use the law to guide investment decisions in specific technologies; for example whether or not to develop products that need chips with the predicted capacity – such as calculators or compact disc players. Governments are willing to provide subsidies in order to help firms avert the danger of not meeting the predicted value. All actors exert themselves to measure up to the predicted competition and to stay in the race. Moore’s Law is the yardstick for the behavior of chip producers and governments in Japan, the United States and Europe, and it shapes their mutual dependency in the strategic game they play with one another.