In this case, the article is implying that Intel (x86) is dead to them and AMD (x86) is the successor. Whether Intel is dead or not is up for debate (I doubt they are), but the saying is used correctly.
No. Intel isn't dead. They may be behind (for now) but they're definitely catching up and have in a way on the desktop.
It's not certain that Intel will die and AMD will for sure win. Competition is great.
Is it just me or has anyone else noticed an increase in arguing over the meaning of words on HN lately?
Wars about semantics have been standard fare on geekdom since the dawn of time, and on Hacker News since the dawn of Arc.
What appears as "Obnoxious Contrarian wilderness" is good-old hacker "well, actually" pendanticness (with some sprinkling of on-the-spectrum focus on details and semantics).
Yes, I have noticed “an increase in arguing over the meaning of words on HN lately”. I also know how to discuss the meaning of words and how they form the context of a conversation, once taken together.
> Wars about semantics have been standard fare on geekdom since the dawn of time, and on Hacker News since the dawn of Arc.
Sure, and I enjoy very much some pedantry (and am not above doing my bit every now and then), but that’s not the point. If someone wants to have a heated discussion about how a centuries-old metaphor would apply to the kings of France but not to a multinational company, then sure, have at it, as long as you don’t derail otherwise useful threads. I will just opt out of spending my time that way and instead get some interesting pedantry.
I must admit I am not really sure what image you want to imply by “dawn of Arc”, though it does go a bit with the French king vibe. Would you care to explicit a little?
> What appears as "Obnoxious Contrarian wilderness" is good-old hacker "well, actually" pendanticness (with some sprinkling of on-the-spectrum focus on details and semantics).
Pedantry and semantics are fine, and indeed one of the reasons why I am here. But the point beyond that has to be knowledge and enlightenment, otherwise it’s just, yes, obnoxious. There is also a thin line between a good “well actually” and a nuisance (not even talking about bad faith trolling).
Please note that I did not address any of the people in question, because that would be stupid, rude, and counter-productive. I am happy if they have their arguments on their side. I was just replying to a fellow commenter that they were not alone with that feeling. There’s no need to be rude about it.
Arc is a Lisp dialect invented by PG whose main notable use is that it is the implementation language for HN: the “dawn of Arc” is thus a flowery way of saying something like “the first concrete steps to the creation of HN”.
I'm sorry, then! (Was I tho? I thought I answered mostly matter-of-factly)
Depends on what you mean by increase, arguing, and words.
Mercari replaced Intel with AMD. One x86 out, another in. Usage is correct if figurative.
Article does not claim Intel is dead. States that they are "catching up". But for their nodes, Intel out ("dead"), AMD in.
It's reasonable.
But this subthread (as started by amusingimpala75), and your direct parent's question was about whether the idiomatic usage of "(old) X is dead, long live (new) X" was correct (given that the author believes AMD taking over Intel is the factual case). That is, not about whether the factual statement is correct or not, just whether it's expressed well idiomatically.
And if a freshly dead king is replaced by a new king, it's "the king is dead, long live the king".
The predecessor and the living thing doesn't have to be of the opposite sex, or use a different term:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_king_is_dead,_long_live_th...!
It's a very famous idiom.
yes, in a particular circumstance, if there happens to be a queen involved (rarer within agnatic primogeniture), then it would be spoken as you say, but that's not "the saying" that people generally quote.
Rarer still, but 2 Queens would have the same form as the saying, "the queen is dead, long live the queen", which I mention to mention, when the king is dead, if it's "long live the queen", it's not generally the king's spouse even if she was styled "queen", but would be some direct blood relative of the king such as his daughter. I think his wife would become Dowager Queen. The Dowager queen might rule as Regent if her children were not adults yet.