Kim Peek

#1

Post by pmoriarty » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 7:55 AM UTC

Kim Peek
en.wikipedia.org

Re: Kim Peek

#2

Post by jonbaer » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 9:21 AM UTC

This was pretty remarkable to watch, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLpCfHH1OVU

The fact that he lacked conceptual encoding really says something.

Re: Kim Peek

#3

Post by x220 » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 9:22 AM UTC

jonbaer wrote: post #2

This was pretty remarkable to watch, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLpCfHH1OVU The fact that he lacked conceptual encoding really says something.

What do you mean by conceptual encoding?

Re: Kim Peek

#4

Post by obituary_latte » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 9:34 AM UTC

x220 wrote: post #3

jonbaer wrote: post #2

This was pretty remarkable to watch, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLpCfHH1OVU The fact that he lacked conceptual encoding really says something.

What do you mean by conceptual encoding?

> Conceptual encoding contributes to the construction of conceptual representations in the mind of the addressee, whilst procedural encoding provides the addressee with instructions as to how conceptual representations are to be manipulated to achieve relevance.

To me it reads as a lack of ability to conceptualize, for instance, others‘ state of mind.

Re: Kim Peek

#5

Post by jonbaer » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 9:37 AM UTC

x220 wrote: post #3

jonbaer wrote: post #2

This was pretty remarkable to watch, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLpCfHH1OVU The fact that he lacked conceptual encoding really says something.

What do you mean by conceptual encoding?

It's explained @ ~around the 35' minute mark, but basically he did not understand or grasp metaphors, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_metaphor - like a machine he would interpret everything literally, excellent case study for some of the obstacles facing AGI in my opinion.

Re: Kim Peek

#6

Post by wubblebubble » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 9:56 AM UTC

also recently featuring kim https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcPzTr-BbAA

Re: Kim Peek

#7

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 10:30 AM UTC

>> Peek read by scanning the left page with his left eye, then the right page with his right eye. According to an article in The Times newspaper, he could accurately recall the contents of at least 12,000 books.[6]

These are pretty extraordinary claims and I'm curious to know whether they were ever tested in controlled conditions.

For example, how does one verify the recollection of the contents of "at least" 12,000 books? Was there an experiment performed, where he was asked questions about a sufficiently large, randomly chosen, sample of those 12,000 books?

I understand that Tim Peek made a living out of his mnemonic abilities and I think, in that context, skepticism is justified.

Re: Kim Peek

#8

Post by riffraff » Sun, Oct 13, 2019, 11:04 AM UTC

I recall seeing him for the first time in a documentary about Daniel Tammet[0].

Seeing him read books by basically just scanning two pages at once was astonishing. If I recall correctly, his father mentioned he had recently started to understand and tell jokes, which I found interesting, and somehow moving.

And on a side note, after seeing "the original", Dustin Hoffman's interpretation in Rain Main felt way more precise than I would have ever thought.

[0] "Brainman", I believe https://guidedoc.tv/documentary/brainman-documentary-film/