Takes me back... There was significant hype around those things when they first managed to build them at scale (~15 years ago), because they were promising for low power, high density persistent storage and are also academically interesting: The "concept" of memristors was explored over 50 years ago (they are passive components that couple electrical charge and magnetical flux, just like a resistor does with current/voltage, a capacitor with voltage/charge or an inductivity with current/flux).<p>But I think the main problem was that they never managed to scale up the clock speeds sufficiently, even though structure size (=> density) was already highly promising from the start.<p>Maybe in a slightly different history with some discoveries in different orders these could have replaced flash memory in SSDs completely.<p>But that whole episode thought me that betting on early technology is <i>hard</i>, and always a risky business, because no matter how promising an approach looks, if it turns out that you can not find the necessary improvements in only a single dimension, then the whole thing is kinda doomed and will probably never be competitive (=> a highly relevant insight especially when speculating about things like novel battery chemistries or the like).