3 ms·
I recommend using Anki. Active recall (meaning you are asked something) is much better than passively reading and spaced repetition have been shown to help lear
by hvass 15y ago
I recommend using Anki. Active recall (meaning you are asked something) is much better than passively reading and spaced repetition have been shown to help learning. If you dig into memory you will surely read about the 'forgetting curve' so usually a program such as Anki has an algorithm to ask you at the point you are about to forget something.
And by now you should wonder what is Anki. Well, it's basically a software flashcard. The neat thing about it is if you find something easy to remember you just click that you find it easy, so it wouldn't ask you as often, but if it's hard, it will be repeated often until it's drilled in your memory.
Here's the link: http://ankisrs.net/ http://ankisrs.net/
P.S.
For learning languages the same way I would recommend http://www.memrise.com http://www.memrise.com which also incorporates in a lot of their lists visual/auditory cues, which I cannot stress how helpful they are in remembering words. Try the SAT vocabulary list, it's fascinating how easy is to remember words when you associate them with a visual cue.
- mpg33 15y agovisual memorization/associative memorization i do not have a problem with.. when i am trying to understand code visual memorization does not seem work..
- gahahaha 15y agoI am reminded of this article on learning math: http://www.ams.org/notices/201010/rtx101001303p.pdf http://www.ams.org/notices/201010/rtx101001303p.pdf """The alternative route to acquiring problem- solving skill in mathematics derives from the work of a Dutch psychologist, De Groot (1946–1965), investigating the source of skill in chess. Research- ing why chess masters always defeated weekend players, De Groot managed to find only one difference. He showed masters and weekend players a board configuration from a real game, removed it after five seconds, and asked them to reproduce the board. Masters could do so with an accuracy rate of about 70% compared with 30% for weekend players. Chase and Simon (1973) replicated these results and additionally demon- strated that when the experiment was repeated with random configurations rather than real-game configurations, masters and weekend players had equal accuracy (±30%). Masters were superior only for configurations taken from real games.""" And what I'm thinking is that maybe (just maybe) you just haven't programmed enough to become a "master programmer" with the ability to remember your program like master chess players remember their games.
- gwern 15y agoThere are other results on chess, you know, like grandmasters spending more effort on falsifying their suggested moves: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.117.8670&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.117... Correlation is not causation, and of the two correlations, I think falsificationism is more useful than quick board-encoding - you don't play chess from memory, you play the position the game is currently at.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]