It doesn't really bother me that cheap chips are on sale--having the latest is not that important to everyone. I'd take an M1 MacBook Air at the right price. (Christmas is coming, folks.)
I do dislike the decoder-ring branding for chips. AMD's in particular is probably not going away since they just introduced it.
In general it's not going away because the model number is supposed to convey 1) the attributes the customer wants (speed, graphics, battery life, cost), 2) the segment the company has decided to market the chip to, 3) technical info on how they hit the specs (µarch, wattage/is it a repurposed desktop chip, E/4C cores, etc.).
Intel is complaining that #3, the architecture, isn't up front, and that annoys us nerds, but at least it's there, in the model number. Regular consumers probably suffer most when #2 (desired segment) is way out of sync with #1 (quality as perceived by the consumer), and someone ends up selling lemons. You'd like to have a market that punishes that; maybe competition will make that happen.
Contributing to the mess is that AMD and Intel are trying to fill every niche in the market with a lot of SKUs, leading to lots of models that are close relatives that've been binned or nerfed to one extent or another (SMT/pro features disabled, etc.). So there's more entropy to pack into a model number.
It probably isn't coincidence that Apple, with a different business model (selling machines not chips) and narrower focus (no super-cheap laptops, no separation of business and consumer products), has a simpler, more understandable lineup.
Though Apple's not immune to making things weird: the recently announced 8GB MacBook Pro seemed to leave enough folks bewildered.