The growing science of memory manipulation • Hacker News Board

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#151

Post by jpttsn » Wed, Sep 04, 2019, 5:07 AM UTC

lostjohnny wrote: post #75

jpttsn wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...fly? Shed skin? Sleep upside down? Survive without oxygen? Travel to mars?

Probably means probably. On the same (wrong) line of thinking we can't say humans can walk because some of them can't. Not all birds fly as well... besides, some animals are better than others for testing purpose. Mice are well known for having a great memory, testing mice for memory makes sense. Recent studies proved that mice memory cells work on experiences and not on places, just like ours.

I’m contesting your claim, not claiming the inverse.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#152

Post by sn41 » Wed, Sep 04, 2019, 12:17 PM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #149

sn41 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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!

Thanks for the suggestion. I was afraid that it will be too dense. I'll give it a shot.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#153

Post by ccvannorman » Wed, Sep 04, 2019, 1:36 PM UTC

carterehsmith wrote: post #138

SkyBelow wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"The honest truth is that you shouldn't. " (believe your own memory) That does not seem like a good way to live. Imagine "not trusting your memory" tomorrow morning, and refusing to recognize your bedroom, your spouse, your kids, family, your house, car, coworkers etc. Seems like one would go insane, quickly. So yeah, I guess you do need to trust your memory - but judiciously.

I think I remember you challenging my assumptions with your comment, but I can't be sure. Tomorrow I'll probably trust in a fallback model for what I think your comment's intention was.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#154

Post by ccvannorman » Wed, Sep 04, 2019, 1:38 PM UTC

This seems to be the defacto state of the world, right? I mean, take a look in any history book (especially US vs European, or any Latin American countries).

Now that it's being called a science perhaps the layperson can get better metrics and telemetry on how it's already being performed by big actors at scale.

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#155

Post by flanbiscuit » Wed, Sep 04, 2019, 9:21 PM UTC

wahern wrote: post #142

corey_moncure wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

oops, yes I meant Shazaam! thanks for the help!

Re: The growing science of memory manipulation

#156

Post by macrolime » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 9:55 AM UTC

sysbin wrote: post #55

macrolime wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the next step. That was the previous step. It's already known and demonstrated many times that deletion is possible, so now they wanted to know if they could also create memories. See more in Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure

I'v been aware of some of the work you're referencing because of the popular goal for solving ptsd in psychiatry. The methods of "drug-induced amnesia, selective memory suppression, destruction of neurons, interruption of memory, reconsolidation,[1] and the disruption of specific molecular mechanism" are not necessarily as great comapred to what was done in the article where optogenetics is referenced as the method o…

Sure, if you want to ensure 100% that's there's no collateral damage to any other memories than what you try to delete, more refined methods like optogenetics will be needed.