Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are the one who came in here and disputed my claim (and those of others as well) without a single shred of evidence. You still refuse to substantiate your disagreement. Nobody is disputing Moore's Law (and this is the first time you've brought it up!). The dispute is around whether people still experience slowdowns and other bad experiences as a result of excessive memory consumption relative to resources, despit…
You are wrong when you say, "Memory is a precious resource." No "precious resource" doubles every two years. You can either accept that objective fact, or you can continue to try and weasel your way around it, but the fact will remain.
First, average primary system memory in a typical laptop does not double every two years. Growth of average installed memory has been linear, not exponential (see, e.g., https://techtalk.pcmatic.com/research-charts-memory/). Second, even if it did grow, software can consume memory faster than it can be provisioned; there's no law that prevents software developers from writing software that utilizes an arbitrary amount of memory. Put differently, adding more memory does not necessarily ensure the software will not consume it, in the same way that adding more freeway lanes is not a guarantee that gridlock will not ensue, or that moving from an apartment into a mansion is not a guarantee that it won't get filled with stuff.