How can a 2023 study possibly inform a 1965 publication? This statement reverses the flow of information entirely.
Moore's Law was an observation based on the technology available in his time; it wasn't waiting for future data to validate it.
The Ritchie and Roser study provides retrospective validation, confirming a trend that Moore identified, but it cannot be presented as having influenced his original thought process.
It's like claiming today's DigiD advancements retroactively informed the eigen risico concept when it was first set.
We need to decide on accurate timelines for research influence.