Live data from Hacker News

The growing science of memory manipulation

scientificamerican.com

141–150 of 156 posts

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#141
post #9

The mere possibility of tampering with memory is indeed the most dangerous thing that could happen to humanity. Imagine not being able to believe your own memory. In fact we don't have to imagine, I believe I've been subjected to "mass gaslighting" on multiple occasions recently on the internet : some piece of information I'm sure I saw on the internet suddenly completely disappears. Google + Facebook + "right to be…

The honest truth is that you shouldn't. People treat memory like a video recording. It is more like a play that is reenacted every time you remember it, where props are pulled out of storage but sometimes the wrong prop is pulled out and yet nothing feels wrong. For example, maybe you remember the day you lost your keys and found them between the pottery. What exactly did that pottery look like? Pull the pottery prop…

Yeah for a decade I had an extremely vivid memory of my grandmother spanking me. But in my 20s I once brought it up when my grandmother mentioned never having spanked anyone. She denied it, said it was my mother and I got confirmation from all of my uncle's they were never spanked.

Really made me realize how untrustworthy even the most vivid memories are.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been aware of how easily my own memory can be manipulated, even by my own self. I've taken stories told to me years ago and have retold them as I had lived them. Then there was the whole Shaq Kazam movie that people swore existed but never did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazaam You mean this movie?

I think he meant the mass delusion about Sinbad playing a genie in a movie called Shazaam. See

https://www.reddit.com/r/MandelaEffect/comments/55f5rt/the_s...

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sinbad-movie-shazaam/

https://news.avclub.com/sinbad-created-a-fake-version-of-tha...

Personally, I think it happened because Sinbad regularly wore windbreakers and parachute pants, the name Sinbad sounds stereotypically Arabic, and perhaps because of his darker skin and pan-ethnic features. When I stumbled onto the meme I never once thought I remembered such a movie, but I instantly understood why people would think that way.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shouldn’t be allowed at all. If your memory is alterable, who’s to say you agreed to it in the first place. I know there are people out there that can benefit from this, but it’s too dangerous to exist.

Other forms of recording?

Even currently, all other forms of recording are useless in terms of use as verification.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#145
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting how much of #metoo could relate to these phenomena.

Eh? You mean, "not at all"? I assume they're talking about the 'satanic ritual abuse' collective delusion here. In this, young children were convinced, through improper questioning (largely by untrained police, not proper psychologists AIUI), that they'd been exposed to some pretty non-specific abuse, often with supernatural elements. This is worlds apart from an adult saying, spontaneously and without any brainwashi…

I only asked on similarities of big public involvement in both cases. If vague memories or feelings can turn into false memories under high informational stream, could it be related? I didn’t mean anything that could be viewed as a refusal or silly joking.

I have a couple of my false memories myself, and these feel very real (but still false). What prevents few of metoo public-induced cases to be alike?

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#146
post #9

The mere possibility of tampering with memory is indeed the most dangerous thing that could happen to humanity. Imagine not being able to believe your own memory. In fact we don't have to imagine, I believe I've been subjected to "mass gaslighting" on multiple occasions recently on the internet : some piece of information I'm sure I saw on the internet suddenly completely disappears. Google + Facebook + "right to be…

In the 1980s and 1990s there was a nationwide (and apparently worldwide) hysteria about satanic cults abusing children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_ritual_abuse

As I child I regularly heard the debates on various talk shows (I watched alot of TV). What was happening was that child psychologists were effectively implanting memories into these children. I found that idea fascinating.

At some point I came up with a game that I would play on the bus ride home from school. There was an undeveloped, partially wooded lot that the bus passed by every day. People would leave things there, especially kids. But the important thing is that week-to-week and even day-to-day the lot would change. Kids might build a fort; somebody might leave or take away some trash; the neighbor might cut the grass or clear some dead wood. The game consisted of 1) noticing something that had changed and 2) inventing something that changed. The next day I would try to pick, before passing the lot, which was the real change and which was the one I invented, and then confirm as I passed.

I very quickly realized how incredibly easy it was to create false memories. Even though I was the one deliberately picking the false memories, I regularly fooled myself. In fact, I got really good at fooling myself. If you visualize an imagined scene and mentally interact with it--imagine walking through it, imagine fake relationships between elements--then for all intents & purposes your memory of it will be little different than if you had been looking at and interacting with something real. Even more scary, I learned that I could consistently misremember things; that is, for a good fake memory I'd consistently pick it day-after-day, even though each prior day I would have realized it was the fake one.

Another thing I learned with my game is that memories are largely about associations, especially plausible associations. We filter particular memories by how well they fit together and how well they comport with the larger narrative. (Which is I think why visualizations are so powerful, as they make it easy to create many elements that fit well together.) If a memory doesn't fit into other memories, like you rationally know you couldn't possibly have been somewhere on some particular day, we tend to discard it. For innocuous memories (e.g. maybe some thought of doing something at the time, but which you didn't actually perform) we filter these out almost imperceptibly. OTOH, sometimes it's difficult to rule out memories, particular innocuous ones, which is why we misremember small stuff so often.

One small thing I've avoided ever since then is looking at photographs. I've found that the mere act of looking at a photograph can almost instantly replace your own memory of an event. That doesn't mean my original memory was any more truthful. But the original is often imbued with certain emotional artifacts that, in my experience, can get washed away by the visual fidelity of a photograph.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#147
post #78

On the other hand, this could mean that people will not have to study anymore (eg a new language), because they can just download it to memory. "Oh man why does this Speak French download takes an entire 3 hours!?!?"

"Downloads taking too long? Subscribe to our notifications service. Get faster downloads for just a single daily memory implantation of a product you 've never bought but already love! Hurry up, supply is limited!"

Introducing new ad blocker: WetBlock Origin, for each new false desire injected by a marketing campaign, WetBlock will introduce a false memory of you already having a satisfying amount of the desired object and enough time of using it as to be slightly bored by the concept.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#148
post #9

The mere possibility of tampering with memory is indeed the most dangerous thing that could happen to humanity. Imagine not being able to believe your own memory. In fact we don't have to imagine, I believe I've been subjected to "mass gaslighting" on multiple occasions recently on the internet : some piece of information I'm sure I saw on the internet suddenly completely disappears. Google + Facebook + "right to be…

In "Ghost in the Shell" there is a sub plot with a man who talks all day about his family until it is revealed to him that it is all false memories. I always found this one of the most horrifying scenes in the movie.

This was already in Blade Runner (which Ghost in the Shell was doubtlessly influenced by), where the replicants have photographs of their families, who never existed, as they were implanted memories.

Ironically, I don't remember if this was in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep (which Blade Runner was loosely based on), but even if it's not, it's a very common theme in Philip K Dick's work.

A similar thing happens in Total Recall, which was also loosely based on PKD's We Can Remember It For You Wholesale, where memories of the protagonist's family and prevois life have been implanted. In this case, the protagonist does not rely on photographs, as he has a wife in the present, but (spoiler) it turns out she's not really his wife.

Oliver Sacks is also worth reading on these themes, as he tells of many real-life cases of people misremembering, misrecognizing, and disbelieving things most everyone else takes for granted, from faces to family to their own body parts to language.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#149
post #107
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tampering with memory is indeed the most dangerous thing that could happen to humanity. For almost two decades now I believed that "Total Recall" was mostly science fiction, that almost none of it will happen in real life anytime soon. Looks like I was wrong. [1] Philip K. Dick was a genius, with Paul Verhoeven not too far behind. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIzFuycHn_0

"We can remember it for you wholesale" is the original short story, I think. Philip K. Dick's works taken as a whole, are mind-boggling. At some point, I want to work through Ubik. Stanislaw Lem, the great Polish sci-fi author of works like Solaris, called Western sci-fi "A Hopeless Case with exceptions" - one of the very very few exceptions was Philip K. Dick. There's also a nice essay on Philip K. Dick specifically…

"At some point, I want to work through Ubik."

I consider Ubik PKD's greatest and most accessible work. It's a really quick, easy read. Do yourself a favor and pick it up now!

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#150
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it is bad to embrace/shrug off memory manipulation with the rationalization that memory has always been reliable. [Edit: Unreliable] It is also bad to ignore the evidence that memories are unreliable with or without memory manipulation. We can acknowledge the weakness without using it as justification.

That sounds pretty level-headed to me. Acknowledging one's own fallibility/being humble in the face of one's own ignorance is broadly helpful. It seems it only becomes a problem when you start deeply distrusting yourself; you can never get away with wholly doubting yourself.

In my experience (I have a pretty TERRIBLE memory - people routinely reference events I participated in but have no recollection of, and when I consider if a particular believable event happened, I can imagine it and have no real way to distinguish the imagination from actual memory), the real problem comes with interacting with those that demonstrate full and utter confidence.

I doubt myself, but I still see the need to make decisions. Most people, faced with my caveats, allow that they can be wrong as well, and we decide things. But the problem cases are without any doubt - my caveats only prove their correctness. If presented with convincing evidence of their fault, they move on to the next thing and never learn that 100% confidence is overconfidence.

I don't know that my lack of trust in my memories makes me more vulnerable to such people or if they only react to facing others as immovable as themselves, with everyone else being indistinguishable speed bumps.

Post reply on HN