Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

ctvnews.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 112 posts

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#51

Post by hsjsbeebue »

vbezhenar wrote: post #26
zackmorris wrote: post #20

I'm curious how this relates to neurodivergent/ADHD/autistic learning where someone has weak rote-memorization skills and mainly remembers things as a fractal of associations. For me, I can't remember that I have an appointment tomorrow, but if you ask me how computers work, I'll start with explaining electron orbitals and band gaps, doping, masking, VLSI, assembly language, C, functional programming and where AI is…

But you're living in US. In US you got paid crazy salaries for programming. Why do you work at failed startups? Just get some job with crazy salary, work there for 5 years and then retire.

At a FAANG. Depends if you can jump the requisite hoops and also stick it out.

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#52

Post by renhanxue »

Video game personality Tim Rogers supposedly has HSAM, and described it like this:

> This is a condition which requires me to remember everything that ever happens within my earshot and eyeshot. No: I describe it impressively: it turns life into noise, and it is useless. Please listen to my noise now, because if you do not, who will? I have lost the ability to hear it.

He wrote a semi-fictional essay about it which I always thought was an interesting read: https://medium.com/@108/what-we-might-mean-when-we-say-a-clo...

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#53

Post by poulsbohemian »

coldtea wrote: post #41
poulsbohemian wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean - is that really the case? It almost sounds like she’s just passively absorbing banal shit rather than there being any kind of consciousness. Kinda like a camera with an endless hard drive. Interesting, but what do you do with it?

> It almost sounds like she’s just passively absorbing banal shit rather than there being any kind of consciousness. So? They don't want to use her as a trove of historically important information, but to study her as a person which "super memory". For that, it doesn't matter if it's about human anatomy, quantum physics, or what was said in every episode of Melrose Place. The mechanism by which those are absorbed and…

Sorry, I don’t think I’m making myself very clear… I think what I’m after here is almost like survivorship bias. Yes, she’s remembering all these things, but I’m wondering about all the things she isn’t either remembering or in control of remembering that would have otherwise been within here sphere to have remembered. From the article it wasn’t clear to me what control she actually has over any of this. Does that make sense?

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#54

Post by petesergeant »

zackmorris wrote: post #20

I'm curious how this relates to neurodivergent/ADHD/autistic learning where someone has weak rote-memorization skills and mainly remembers things as a fractal of associations. For me, I can't remember that I have an appointment tomorrow, but if you ask me how computers work, I'll start with explaining electron orbitals and band gaps, doping, masking, VLSI, assembly language, C, functional programming and where AI is…

> For me, I can't remember that I have an appointment tomorrow

I have seen this cited a few times as evidence of ADHD, and without any comment at all on your own situation (a stranger, who I don't know, on the internet), isn't this in particular mostly true of everyone? I have a calendar and a todo-list app specifically for this reason.

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#55

Post by petesergeant »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #53
coldtea wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It almost sounds like she’s just passively absorbing banal shit rather than there being any kind of consciousness. So? They don't want to use her as a trove of historically important information, but to study her as a person which "super memory". For that, it doesn't matter if it's about human anatomy, quantum physics, or what was said in every episode of Melrose Place. The mechanism by which those are absorbed and…

Sorry, I don’t think I’m making myself very clear… I think what I’m after here is almost like survivorship bias. Yes, she’s remembering all these things, but I’m wondering about all the things she isn’t either remembering or in control of remembering that would have otherwise been within here sphere to have remembered. From the article it wasn’t clear to me what control she actually has over any of this. Does that ma…

I think you are speaking past the person you're talking with. Yes, as a skill, it's probably got limited utility for her. However, we learn more about how the brain works by studying people whose brains don't work like everyone else's brain, and trying to figure out how they're different. Therefore, it's people who want to learn more about how the brain works who "[truly care] that she can remember what was playing on Netflix three years ago"

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#56

Post by cyrillite »

zackmorris wrote: post #20

I'm curious how this relates to neurodivergent/ADHD/autistic learning where someone has weak rote-memorization skills and mainly remembers things as a fractal of associations. For me, I can't remember that I have an appointment tomorrow, but if you ask me how computers work, I'll start with explaining electron orbitals and band gaps, doping, masking, VLSI, assembly language, C, functional programming and where AI is…

This is how my memory works, especially for autobiographical things. Aka me a direct autobiographical question and I may not be able to retrieve it. Find an association and I can recall with quite astonishing clarity and in ways which I can confirm, with testing and with historical research, aren’t mere confabulations.

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#58

Post by lr4444lr »

zackmorris wrote: post #20

I'm curious how this relates to neurodivergent/ADHD/autistic learning where someone has weak rote-memorization skills and mainly remembers things as a fractal of associations. For me, I can't remember that I have an appointment tomorrow, but if you ask me how computers work, I'll start with explaining electron orbitals and band gaps, doping, masking, VLSI, assembly language, C, functional programming and where AI is…

What makes you say that autistic people have weak rote but strong associative memory?

One common feature of high functioning autistics is an obsession with the memorization of minutiae (on some topic of intense interest) without at all understanding context.

For example, a former classics professor I knew told us about a relative of his who memorized the entire Persian king list for dozens of dynasties long. He couldn't tell you much actual Persian history at all, but the professor unabashedly admitted that almost no one of his colleagues outside of the actual specialists in Persian history could recite that list even with a gun to their heads, despite being capable of lecturing on Persian history due to their education.

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#59

Post by HeWhoLurksLate »

typon wrote: post #46

This girl uses her memory superpower to remember irrelevant celebrity facts and Netflix release dates..? Not sure if this is a reflection of the wider culture but this is pretty depressing.

And we're generally impressed when somebody gets Doom running on a toothbrush, not much difference really

Re: 'Super memory': Why Emily Nash is sharing her brain with science

#60

Post by mateo1 »

PKop wrote: post #28
poulsbohemian wrote: post #19

This is fascinating, but I’m left confused at the banality. Maybe it’s just the way the article was written, but truly, who cares that she can remember what was playing on Netflix three years ago? It does cause me to wonder if brains are attuned to certain things - like in this woman’s case, is she particularly interested in celebrities and that’s why all the examples given are out of the tabloid headlines? The artic…

Yea the choice of questions to ask her was ridiculous. I mean start there maybe, and escalate to something more interesting, or go further back in time etc. Such a lack of imagination. It's almost like everyone wanted to believe and didn't want to push the limits to break their impression of it being some super power.

Also with the other woman they used as an example, the only thing she did is say that X date was a Thrursday or something, which might simply be a trick and not a memory recall.
Post reply on HN