Let me elaborate on my post, since it has been misinterpreted. I was responding to the ideas in the article. I of course understand the advantages of non-binar

Let me elaborate on my post, since it has been misinterpreted. I was responding to the ideas in the article. I of course understand the advantages of non-binary encodings in the many applications people mentioned, e.g. hard disks, flash memory, etc. Another common use is digital cable, which generally uses 256-QAM. But let's look at the article itself, which was discussing ternary for general purpose CPU design. Here's a snippet: the first working ternary computer was ... designed by Nikolai P. Brusentsov and his colleagues at Moscow State University ... Some 50 machines were built between 1958 and 1965. [It] operated on numbers composed of 18 ternary digits, or trits ... I stand by what I first said. The above computers were probably wonderful academic toys, but otherwise were "a cure for no known disease". Neither Intel nor anyone else will build a CPU with registers that store ternary numbers. Nor will they build cache memory that stores ternary numbers. Nor will there be any new ARM architecture forthcoming that switches from binary to ternary. Etc.