Slashdot Mirror
Are Computers Stealing Your Memory?
alangmead writes: "According to this article in the Sunday Times an increasing number of
people in their twenties and thirties are suffering from severe memory loss. Doctors blame this problem on their over relience on PDAs and computers for holding information for them. As one doctor succinctly put it, 'Young people today are becoming stupid.' I know that I rely heavily on PDAs for keeping track of things for me, but it was because I was already forgetting things. Maybe my decision to use them is rather short sighted."
cat memory >> /dev/null
siri
Wow, I'm inclined to trust a doctor's opinion who equates memory loss with stupidity.
Albert Einstein never bothered to remember menial things like phone numbers. He'd probably be a big PDA user if he was alive today.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
I think my memory loss might be more related to the tendency of people my age -- smoking a lot of pot.
go get it
Perhaps this is a sign of a greater shift in importance from pure memory to analytical skills. The teaching world seems by and large to have followed that.
I'm taking a math class right now and having a hard time because the prof seems to have put such a high emphasis on memorization. However, working as a programmer in lots of different environments and rapidly changing technologies, i've found that my capacity for research has helped me far more than my memory.
Too much info == not enough time to process it. The younger you are, the more info is thrown at you, and the better you get at processing it, but the less time you have to spend memorizing any of it. Information is commoditizing, and consequently becoming less valuable intrinsically as consituent parts. Those who can make sense of it in a larger view do well, and those who hang onto it will find themselves with that info and not much else when that info is no longer valid.
just my blog and pix
Please, using a PDA is no different than telling your secretary to remind you of your appointments for the day, or keeping numbers in a rolodex, or even having your secretary keep numbers in a rolodex. "Ms. Smith, please get Mr. Brown on the phone". I'm sure any programmer with a PDA can remember the syntax of all the commonly used C commands, regardless of whether they know their mother's phone number. I think that's a much more impressive feat of memory.
However, there is some relevance here. As we rely more on technology, we become more interested in things getting done, and not how they get done. For instance, many grade schools now allow calculators to be used in grade 2 to add and subtract. Only a couple lessons are spent on multiplying or division, and then it's simply plugged into the calculators. What this results in is that students get their homework done faster, and with fewer calculation mistakes, but they have NO idea why it works. When these same students hit calculus, algebra, etc, they become lost, because they don't have the basic mathematical foundations to understand the more complex ones -- they just know the calculator can do it. Society ends up with people pulling out a pocket calculator to figure out how much the tax on their big mac meal is going to be because they can't add 5% in their heads. This ignorance simply perpetuates itself. Instead of understanding how a mathematical simulation of a complex model works, it's taken for granted that some programmer correctly entered the formula they were handed. The answer pops up, it looks right, so we continue on, and then boom, a nuclear bomb goes off in Iowa.
Someone with solid basic math skills could probably make a killing by adding an extra percent to grocery, restraunt, or shopping bills, because just about anybody who checked their bills wouldn't have a clue that they were being overcharged.
- In hell, treason is the work of angels.
...about this, I can't remember where though... I think it said... um... forget it, next time I'll bookmark it.
I am become Troll, destroyer of threads
Oh well. More crap for the "information overload is a disease" pamphlets. Using external memory aids is only going to help you remember things better, so don't take the article's implicit device and throw out your datebook.
As I became a computer geek I went from remembering books worth of information in my head to keeping a rough draft of many many more types of information in my head along with knowledge of how to find the details when needed. So it may seem I remember fewer things but really it is just a memory management technique. For me I can't completely work when you take away the Net because it's became a part of my mind. Eventually I suppose enough people will evolve around the Net that it'll have a direct hack to the Net directly into the human body. Every step closer takes us that way. Mainframe to desktop to laptop to PDA etc. It gives intelligent people great flexibility to be able to only remember what they must and to store the details somewhere else. Anyone can be reasonably expert in anything if they learn how to look up the information on demand and understand how it goes together.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
So what if people use Palmpilots as auxillary storage for stupid crap
(like '1 yr anvrsry 05/23, make rez at cafe de la pimp', for example).
Just because you use a Palmpilot to 'remember' appointments does not mean you're getting 'stupid', just that you have more important things to keep track of in 'moist memory'.
My 'trivial crap memory' has sucked as long as I can remember (heh), but stuff I've done on a day-to-day basis in the past sticks to this day.
I could prolly be back up to speed in VB within a day if I had to be, even though I haven't touched it in ~3 years.
It's the one-off stuff that catches me, and thus, goes into the Visor.
Sounds to me like the case examples referenced had more to do with people not paying attention in the first place, rather than forgetting.
--K
As a programmer, I can see both sides to this. On the one hand, that's what manuals are for. I shouldn't have to memorize every single function name and what its arguments are. On the other hand, many things are very very useful to have committed to memory for the sake of efficient programming. The programmer who has a good subset of Emacs or VI commands committed to memory and can generate complex regex's on the fly, will be much quicker at doing complex editing tasks than the programmer who looks these things up in a reference every time he needs them. If you get in the mode of always looking up and copying, you may retain some of the more common commands simply due to repetition. However, if you consciously examine the command (actually observe the thing) or think of a simple mnemonic device for recalling it, you'll have much better command and efficiency over the toolset you are working with.
----
Celebrate the finer things in life
I am glad that today I'm taught how to think instead of what to think. Maybe you're thinking of church instead of school? I don't know, but I learn what to think by myself. Nobody tells me. I am just taught the basics of how to solve a problem, then I must piece the puzzle together myself. I can't always have a teacher standing by my side when a problem comes up that I have never seen before. If I learn to just "do" a specific problem, then I will never be able to do a different problem, even if the concepts behind the two are related. I must learn the concepts first so that I can apply them to any problem.
Strict memorization is not the key to anything, besides getting an "A" on your test or quiz. You may be able to recall the information that day, but what about the next day? Or the next year? I doubt you could recall it. What is important today is application. You don't learn what 2 + 2 is. You learn how to get your answer. Of course, one doesn't have to ask themselves "ok, I have two, and I have to add two to it, what do I have now?" After applying the concept of addition over and over to the same problem you naturally remember the answer. This is the best way, by far, to learn--not only in math, but any subject.
However, if you don't know what an answer is, you learn where you can find it. It is so much more important today to know where you can find an answer if you don't know it, since there is so much more information today. It's more important to learn "how to get an answer" than "the answer." That's why teachers in math, physics, etc. give credit to incorrect answers. It's the correct steps to getting to an answer that are more important. Not the answer itself.
You had to learn how to recall trivial things, because it was the only way to survive and prosper. The best minds of my day were like that.
That doesn't work today, unless you plan on going on Who Wants to be a Millionaire. Application today is the key. Not the recollection of pointless facts.
You have to give them rigid rules and test them on their grasp thereof.
I took one of those today. They are called quizes. I have another one tomorrow. It's called a test.
You can't teach a whole generation to drive society by encouraging them to feel about driving. You have to give them rigid rules and test them on their grasp thereof. And if they don't conform, then you make them conform.
You add 2 + 2 and you get 4. Hypothetically, let's say that when I see 2 + 2 I had 1 + 1 + 1 + 1. I did it differently than your way, which is the "normal" method, but am I wrong? By your standards I am.
What's needed is a better combination of the two methods. We should insist that our children learn both what and how to think. Only that way can we insure that the new generations can learn from my generation's mistakes and fulfill our promises of greatness.
So in Literature class, we should teach students that one work sucks just because, but this other one doesn't instead of explaining why it is such a good work and how to distinguish them from others that are not?
So, to summarize everything here, school today is not about remembering answers. It's how to get answers to infinite amounts of problems. There is only so much that you can remember. There is no limit on the application of concepts. Now there is something you can remember. So do it.
I have no idea what my social security number [...] is
Translation: I have not gone to college.
Modern technology is being designed to replace existing, decent applications. The best example is the idea of a date book. You can step through several iterations of this technology:
It's important to have technology that complements current ideals. Such as datebooks that remind us every morning what we have to do that day. Or reminds us to start thinking about paying off that AmEx bill. Without these hooks into our brain to remember things, yes we do forget about them. But with advanced enough software to remind us of the little things (such as give Sweetest day presents, attending useless meetings, or wash behind our ears) we can use our potent intellect for more advanced processing and more advanced thinking.
For instance, i've been using my extra capacity to memorizing Counter-Strike maps. Currently I'm up to 20-30 or so maps that I know by heart. However, I'm sure Dr Takashi Tsukiyama would put me in the 'stupid as hell' catagory because I can't remember my own cell phone number because I have it stored in 5 different electronic places and on my business cards. And well, that one number I've avoided memorizing has allowed me to know where to snipe on de_jeepathon2k. Hurray for technology!
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
Well, at least you got this part almost right:
>Kids are being taught how to think, instead of what to think, out of some liberal notion that we shouldn't make their beliefs conform to our own experienced ones.
Though to be completely correct, it would be "some liberal notion that understanding logic, reasoning, and how to do your own research is more important than being able to recite 'facts' that someone else presents to you".
Having attended schools that were on opposite extremes of this -- a state school (where everything was "fact", "skill and drill"), and Caltech, where, everything very heavily emphasized understanding basic principles, I can say with some experience that "skill and drill", and memorizing "facts" is a total crock.
The "tough" problems at the state school were the ones where they used variable "x", instead of variable "z" (like in the book). This would complete mystify most of the class, because they'd "learned" to recite "facts", instead of understanding principles. At Caltech, after having one problem during the term emphasizing a basic principle, you'd be expected to be able to apply that principle to novel problems for the rest of the course. You were never expect to regurgitate it as some "fact".
There are volumes of research, now, backing this. Not only do more comprehensive teaching techniques produce students that are better able to apply their knowledge to novel problems, it turns out they also enjoy it much more, and are more interested in pursuing education.
I had a great argument refuting this article, but I forgot what I was gonna say...
To quote my high school football coach (no I didn't play): "Our team can't even hold the ball, let alone do any fancy passes."
The trick is time management. Less and less of a given day is available for a given subject.. I've watched as my high school periods shrunk from an hour per class to 40 minutes. Skill and drill works very well in the military where they can't make any assumptions about your competence. They've found a system that keeps their soldiers alive, so they're going to burn it into their heads like little dogs (at least for the enlisted).
For those that could care less about school, and for the school where the teachers are most worried about keeping the kids quiet and paying attention, getting them to complete their times tables might be enough (or equivalently, being able to spell conscience).
Cal-tech isn't for your average high-school graduate, and it assumes a certain level of personal discipline.
There's an alterior approach known as montasori(sp?). Which is a hands on method. It's a great motivational tool, but as I've seen from it's graduates, they tend to be behind in the amount of material they cover. A quote from a graduate, "It's a fun school, not a science school."
In short, different methods work for different people. Those that feel confined by "skill and drill" are more than welcome to seek out more sophisticated approaches.
-Michael
-Michael
Example: I have no idea what my social security number, blood type or insurer is. If I was ever in an accident, I'd be good as dead. However, that seems unlikely since I'm inside all day playing Counter-Strike, of which I've memorized every inch of every stage, the cost of each gun and ammo type, and the IP address of my favorite servers. My memory is now commited to useful things.
Given a reasonably level playing field, who would win a fight between a bear and a shark?
Yeah, like that happened...
Don Negro
Don Negro
Perl 6 will give you the big knob. -- Larry Wall
Or made us code stuff that was already in the STL or an existing library?
I can see the point for learning something once, but these examples usually existed in classes where you were not allowed to use advanced calculators or the STL or(name your specific example here) throughout the entire class!
And they give the lamest excuses for making us hold onto the way they learned to do something! "If you get stuck on a desert island, you'll be glad you learned how to use a slide rule." Yeah, right.
If humanity is to progress, we must learn things once, and learn how not to reinvent the wheel. The skill we should be learn is to find out whether or not a problem has been solved before - if so apply the solution, and if not, be able to use our wit, intelligence, or if those are lacking, a smarter persons wit and intelligence to solve the problem.
Our society is getting an order of magnitude more complex each generation. We need to have computers do our grunt thinking for us if we are to keep up with advancing technology.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
Remember Sean Connery as Indiana Jones' father in the most recent movie? Indiana asks him something, Dad says it's in his diary and he doesn't know, Indiana disbelievingly asks him if he can't remember, Dad summons up his dignity and replies, "I wrote it down so that I wouldn't have to remember."
Or my favorite quote from Alan Turing (paraphrased): Programming should always be exciting, because as soon as something becomes boring or repetitive, it should be turned over to the machine.
I've automated so many of my sysadmin duties that I can't remember how to do them manually anymore. :-) Frees up more time for programming.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Um, basics of logic? Correlation is not causation? Aren't scientists of all people supposed to know these things?
Maybe it is?
a
"I think any time you expose vulnerabilities it's a good thing." -Attorney General Janet Reno
If people are no longer exercising their memories at all because they can rely on PDAs and other tools, certainly their memories will atrophy. However, I know a significant number of people who use various tools to keep track of large bodies of information that has no intrinsic significance in order to free themselves to learn things that are useful to them.
As an example, I stopped trying to remember my parents' phone number the first time they moved after I left home. The only importance that sequence of digits has is a way to reach them. But I still take the time to remember the names of their friends and neighbors at each new home. I've met several of them. They are important. I don't bother remembering things that I can look up when I need them, but I give more attention to things I may need to know when I can't consult my secondary storage.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
(attention deficit disorder) Diagnosed, but it is simply a subcategory of a whole brace of culturally and biologically derived symptoms. When I was a kid I sure wished I had a laptop and a PDA, so I could read what I wrote, catch everything the teachers said, and not drift off.
That stuff sure helps me now. My brain is so active now because I can stay consistent on something for an extended period of time, without having a teacher to watch over me to do it!
What's wrong with shaping my environment to increase my effectiveness? And who would think that they are the only person who efficiently uses these tools, either? Most people who invest in these tools and continue to use them must find a use for them.
Maybe it's video games that breed stupidity? Some marketer deliberately harnessing eyeballs? Screw video games, lets focus on educational technology. My attention span certainly improved when I figured out all the useful, profitable, and interesting things I could do with a computer.
Wouldn't you think everyone else's would, too?
-perdida
Goat sex free since 2001
Your right, but I forgot why.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
It's not just kids' memories, though they're the ones who are feeling the brunt of it, having spent the most time in the environment our society has created for them and for us. People everywhere have been experiencing deteriorating memories, and I'd say it has to do with how we teach them in school.
It used to be that you'd learn facts in school. You'd get a big textbook or two and carry it around in your burlap sack, go to classes and get orally quizzed on your ability to recall facts, and go home and get the snot beaten out of you if you didn't show any progress. You had to learn how to recall trivial things, because it was the only way to survive and prosper. The best minds of my day were like that.
Today? The emphasis is on task-based learning and goal-oriented teaching. Kids are being taught how to think, instead of what to think, out of some liberal notion that we shouldn't make their beliefs conform to our own experienced ones. It sounds great on paper, but in reality, kids are not only failing to learn how to think, they don't even know what to think about anymore. This is why you see much greater emphasis on arts and other trivial applications of human talents, instead of engineering and classical studies. For better or worse, we're breeding a generation of mental invalids.
You can't teach a whole generation to drive society by encouraging them to feel about driving. You have to give them rigid rules and test them on their grasp thereof. And if they don't conform, then you make them conform. It's not totalitarianism; it's just common sense.
What's needed is a better combination of the two methods. We should insist that our children learn both what and how to think. Only that way can we insure that the new generations can learn from my generation's mistakes and fulfill our promises of greatness.
Read the rest of this comment...