That's not necessarily the point, the point is, first and foremost, that they've been unable to demonstrate good performance on any real benchmarks. You argue t

That's not necessarily the point, the point is, first and foremost, that they've been unable to demonstrate good performance on any real benchmarks. You argue that they're good at things which need to represent "time", but the fact of the matter is that they're still far behind RNNs/LSTMs. And also, your assertion that you "can't have 32-bit floats" and therefore we should go analog (which is what this project wants) is a rather poor understanding of the challenges facing computer architecture in the modern day. The problem is data movement, not the computation. For example, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories estimates that the cost of moving a 64-bit word 1mm ON CHIP will be approximately equal to the cost of a 64-bit FLOP on 10nm.