5 ms·

Hmm... At least for normal people memories of events that haven't happened in real life [but happened in sleep, video games, films, books; or just been imagine

Hmm... At least for normal people memories of events that haven't happened in real life [but happened in sleep, video games, films, books; or just been imagined] are certainly distinguishable from memories of events that did happen in the real world. Even without external references. There's some metadata present that marks these memories as 'not recorded in the real world'. And even aside from that metadata, continuity and memory quality normally gives pretty damn good clues. No need to ask for 'independent corroboration'. <striked>And, if the opposite was true, you wouldn't be able to distinguish a memory from your last night dreams from a memory of a previous day. As simple as that.</striked> Edit: rm anecdotal evidence.

recursive 13y ago
I used to share that view until it was proven to me that certain "real" memories that I had never happened.
tokenadult 13y ago
You have already forgotten what the article says. "AG: How does this happen? What exactly is going on when we retrieve a memory? "EL: When we remember something, we're taking bits and pieces of experience—sometimes from different times and places—and bringing it all together to construct what might feel like a recollection but is actually a construction. The process of calling it into conscious awareness can change it, and now you're storing something that's different. We all do this . . . " The way I have expressed the matter before in discussions on Hacker News is that the problem with human memory is that read operations and simultaneously write operations. We think we are just recalling, but we are actively reshaping our understanding of previous events, true or false.
- dchichkov 13y ago
  Forgotten what the article says? Not really. I've got an impression of it, and I didn't quite liked it. The whole concept of 'false memory' is very murky. There are no 'false memories' as such. There are just memories formed under different circumstances. That includes sleep and reflection. And we just have to agree to disagree about last few statements in that article, on the page two. Edit: I completely agree with you and with the statement that recounting something may change or reorganize the memory. It is just the concept of 'false' memories that I dislike. It is very poorly defined.
  - dsego 13y ago
    The concept is entirely fitting. The memory is false because you never save the entire experience as a memory fragment, instead you have bits and pieces and you reconstruct the rest when recollecting. If you reconstruct something that never happened or is factually wrong you are creating a false memory.
mikeash 13y ago
Must every article of this nature on HN be accompanied by an idiotic comment that refutes science with anecdote? I'm getting righteously tired of it.
- dchichkov 13y ago
  Can you be more specific, what particular parts of my comment are you finding to be idiotic? I do have formal background in machine learning, computer science and had taken classes in neuroscience. I am a PhD dropout and I did original research in computer vision. I have every right to comment on articles written by specialists on 'false memories'.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    I don't really understand why you bring up machine learning and computer science, since this is a completely different field. Classes in neuroscience would apply, but that's not all that impressive. What I find to be idiotic is how trivial you make your contradiction, without any facts to back it up, adding computerish language to pander to the HN crowd ("metadata", really?), when it's extremely well established that people, with disturbing frequency, remember things that simply did not happen. It's fine to disagree, but this sort of straightforward contradiction adds little to the conversation. It's the internet equivalent of Monty Python's argument clinic.
    - dchichkov 13y ago
      Just check some real, no bullshit, modern research like this: https://sites.google.com/site/gallantlabucb/publications/nishimoto-et-al-2011 https://sites.google.com/site/gallantlabucb/publications/nis... Who do you think are these researchers? More ML or more neuroscience? ///These disciplines are very relevant to understanding how memories are stored. More relevant than neuroscience in fact. Say, if you'd study modern computer vision, you will have some understanding about mechanisms in the works of human visual subsystem; about how humans memorize, recognize and associate images and image sequences. You will not have that understanding, if you'd study modern (basic) neuroscience.
brazzy 13y ago
I have personally experienced that metadata getting messed up - one day I found myself with a very vivid memory of having recently, in real life, an anxiety attack while crossing a pedestrian suspension bridge across a river near my home. But there is no such bridge, and I could also not tell when exactly this had happened. The only explanation I have is that this was a dream that my brain somehow misfiled as a real experience. In constrast, I otherwise never remember my dreams unless I wake in the middle of one, and even then they completely fade from my memory within minutes.
- dsego 13y ago
  It is weird how in dreams everything changes, you are in your house but the house is from a movie you watched that day. And a distant family members lives with you in this house or something. And it all fits and seems incredibly normal. I always think of dreaming as brain defragmenting itself and your conscious picking up on it, trying to make sense of it.

recursive 13y ago

I used to share that view until it was proven to me that certain "real" memories that I had never happened.

tokenadult 13y ago

You have already forgotten what the article says. "AG: How does this happen? What exactly is going on when we retrieve a memory? "EL: When we remember something, we're taking bits and pieces of experience—sometimes from different times and places—and bringing it all together to construct what might feel like a recollection but is actually a construction. The process of calling it into conscious awareness can change it, and now you're storing something that's different. We all do this . . . " The way I have expressed the matter before in discussions on Hacker News is that the problem with human memory is that read operations and simultaneously write operations. We think we are just recalling, but we are actively reshaping our understanding of previous events, true or false.

dchichkov 13y ago
Forgotten what the article says? Not really. I've got an impression of it, and I didn't quite liked it. The whole concept of 'false memory' is very murky. There are no 'false memories' as such. There are just memories formed under different circumstances. That includes sleep and reflection. And we just have to agree to disagree about last few statements in that article, on the page two. Edit: I completely agree with you and with the statement that recounting something may change or reorganize the memory. It is just the concept of 'false' memories that I dislike. It is very poorly defined.
- dsego 13y ago
  The concept is entirely fitting. The memory is false because you never save the entire experience as a memory fragment, instead you have bits and pieces and you reconstruct the rest when recollecting. If you reconstruct something that never happened or is factually wrong you are creating a false memory.

mikeash 13y ago

Must every article of this nature on HN be accompanied by an idiotic comment that refutes science with anecdote? I'm getting righteously tired of it.

dchichkov 13y ago
Can you be more specific, what particular parts of my comment are you finding to be idiotic? I do have formal background in machine learning, computer science and had taken classes in neuroscience. I am a PhD dropout and I did original research in computer vision. I have every right to comment on articles written by specialists on 'false memories'.
- mikeash 13y ago
  I don't really understand why you bring up machine learning and computer science, since this is a completely different field. Classes in neuroscience would apply, but that's not all that impressive. What I find to be idiotic is how trivial you make your contradiction, without any facts to back it up, adding computerish language to pander to the HN crowd ("metadata", really?), when it's extremely well established that people, with disturbing frequency, remember things that simply did not happen. It's fine to disagree, but this sort of straightforward contradiction adds little to the conversation. It's the internet equivalent of Monty Python's argument clinic.
  - dchichkov 13y ago
    Just check some real, no bullshit, modern research like this: https://sites.google.com/site/gallantlabucb/publications/nishimoto-et-al-2011 https://sites.google.com/site/gallantlabucb/publications/nis... Who do you think are these researchers? More ML or more neuroscience? ///These disciplines are very relevant to understanding how memories are stored. More relevant than neuroscience in fact. Say, if you'd study modern computer vision, you will have some understanding about mechanisms in the works of human visual subsystem; about how humans memorize, recognize and associate images and image sequences. You will not have that understanding, if you'd study modern (basic) neuroscience.

brazzy 13y ago

I have personally experienced that metadata getting messed up - one day I found myself with a very vivid memory of having recently, in real life, an anxiety attack while crossing a pedestrian suspension bridge across a river near my home. But there is no such bridge, and I could also not tell when exactly this had happened. The only explanation I have is that this was a dream that my brain somehow misfiled as a real experience. In constrast, I otherwise never remember my dreams unless I wake in the middle of one, and even then they completely fade from my memory within minutes.

dsego 13y ago
It is weird how in dreams everything changes, you are in your house but the house is from a movie you watched that day. And a distant family members lives with you in this house or something. And it all fits and seems incredibly normal. I always think of dreaming as brain defragmenting itself and your conscious picking up on it, trying to make sense of it.