From http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4126966 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4126966 I learned that HP's memristor claims are controversial within the r

From http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4126966 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4126966 I learned that HP's memristor claims are controversial within the research community: http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0004 http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0004 http://www.slideshare.net/blaisemouttet/mythical-memristor http://www.slideshare.net/blaisemouttet/mythical-memristor Some of the controversy is about priority, which may not matter so much; I care less about whom I get massive on-chip non-volatile storage from than that I get it at all. But that too is under dispute (e.g. "Myth #3" in the second link above). So it's a little distressing to see signs of vaporware from HP at this point. I really want this! Also, the OP links to a post (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/09/hp_memristor_and_photons/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/09/hp_memristor_and_pho...) in which Williams says something odd: "We're not going to make money off these chips. We are going to make money by building cool systems utilising these chips." If his memristor claims are true, the chips themselves could hardly be more of a game changer – worth billions to put it mildly.