Is Moore's Law truly the definitive benchmark for genome sequencing costs? Relying on just one measure feels like a scarce way to understand progress when resources for actual research are always dwindling.
The initial spark from a publication is one thing, but the finite attention and dwindling funds for science are what really decide if a trend continues.
Without sustained investment, even the most promising technological 'law' is just a footnote.
For instance, if NHS funding for innovative treatments shrinks, even perfect genome sequencing won't help patients if the next stage of drug development can't get off the ground.