  For the last 60 years, advances in conventional computing platforms have been
driven by the empirical notion known as Moores law. In its essence, Moores law
is a ubiquitous description of the exponential increase in transistor density
acting as a proxy for computing power as a function of time. While this trend
started as an interesting observation, it has evolved into a self-fulfilling
prophecy used to drive the entire semiconductor industry. Arguments for or
against the end of Moores law have proliferated and the reluctant consensus is
that Moores law will disappear. Warnings of the end of this trend have been
repeatedly thwarted by advances in many different aspects of the computing
ecosystem including materials improvements, device design, device or circuit
cleverness, and software and architectural innovations. While many have argued
the impending doom of Moores law is the ultimate roadblock imposed by atomic
length scales, quantum processes, and energy consumption limits, we contend
that Moores law must be jettisoned for a different reason: Words matter. Even
those who adamantly declare the end of Moores law still use the language of
Moores law. The inward focus of this notion imposes an intellectual tyranny
that inhibits revolutionary progress. We suggest instead a more outwardly
focused perspective and suggest a shift in language to a regime we coin the
Feynman Mandate. In this perspective, we outline the issues with the continued
use of Moores law as well as a prescription of transitioning to a new lexicon.
We outline a new, more general metric for ascertaining progress and identify
the roles of various stakeholders in this process.
