I'm going to ignore the first half of your comment, because it really only serves to disclose the limits of your knowledge.

The problem with your rambling and speculation is that you're not making any attempt to think about what conditions would be necessary for a technology to succeed in the market and gain widespread adoption across many market segments. I stand by my assertion that it is impossible for compute-in-memory chips to entirely replace commodity DRAM, especially in any market segment where the compute portion of those memory chips is not critically valuable. Any remotely plausible, useful compute-in-memory design will have significantly lower capacity and higher cost than pure commodity DRAM; this is not a low-overhead added feature. Any market segment where the compute capabilities of compute-in-memory were so marginally valuable that a non-trivial number of the customers wanted to disable the compute is a market segment where everybody would still be buying mostly ordinary DRAM.

>"I'm going to ignore the first half of your comment, because it really only serves to disclose the limits of your knowledge."

Read my profile: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=peter_d_sherman

On there, you will find the following quote:

"The true knowledge consists of knowing that one knows nothing..."

- Socrates

See, I'm agreeing with you(!), at least on that part of your message, at least on that comment!

You see, I truly don't know...

And, I don't truly know what the future as-of-yet holds...

I suggest and submit to you that this is the foundation of intellectual humility, which is the starting point of all forms of inquiry which have the potential to lead to genuine knowledge, at least in the specific areas of inquiry, and at least for specific amounts of time ("the only constant is change", aka, many forms of specific knowledge, if acquired, are time bounded, bounded in time -- but I digress!)

>"The problem with your rambling and speculation..."

My inquiry into the nature of this phenomena, but sure, your (perceived!) "rambling and speculation" on my part (I'm chuckling to myself, because that's rather funny from my perspective(!) -- yours is the first message on HN that has truly made me laugh!)

>is that you're not making any attempt to think about what conditions would be necessary for a technology to succeed in the market and gain widespread adoption across many market segments. I stand by my assertion that it is impossible for compute-in-memory chips to entirely replace commodity DRAM, especially in any market segment where the compute portion of those memory chips is not critically valuable. Any remotely plausible, useful compute-in-memory design will have significantly lower capacity and higher cost than pure commodity DRAM; this is not a low-overhead added feature. Any market segment where the compute capabilities of compute-in-memory were so marginally valuable that a non-trivial number of the customers wanted to disable the compute is a market segment where everybody would still be buying mostly ordinary DRAM.

I see...

So the premise of your argument is The Market (specifically the future consumer commodity DRAM market)... correct?