2 ms·

If only it worked like a log, though. Unless you're a John von Neumann level outlier, you can't query your memory for "what's everything I did between 9 and 10

• carapace 7y ago
  What have you tried?
  • meowface 7y ago
    Nothing. Just saying memory alone isn't sufficient for most people. Most would need to rely on something else in addition, like remembering to manually make note of things in the moment.
    • carapace 7y ago
      First, let me say that I'm not against e.g. "quantified self" et. al. at all. It's fine. (IMO) And writing has, in general, been a benefit, eh? > Just saying memory alone isn't sufficient for most people. I'm merely pointing out that the reason we (as evolving beings) have memory in the first place is due to the adaptive advantage of "logging" experience. ;-) FWIW, memory has been sufficient for most people: we're here, therefore every one of our ancestors did at least well enough to make a baby (who grew up to do at least well enough to make another baby, and so on right up until you, today.)
      • meowface 7y ago
        Right, I mean memory is sufficient for most sorts of things, but if you want to do the sort of retrospective debugging and analysis the article talks about, you either need to be born a savant or rely on some external system. Eventually, when we have good neural interfaces, I think this will be done automatically, but that may or may not happen in any of our lifetimes. Natural selection is good for ensuring you make it to a bit past reproductive age, but for everything else it's really hit-or-miss. As one would expect. We're just the first known lifeforms that seem to have an imperative beyond replication.