Similar Posts

  • |

    #93 Second-Hand Memories and Trust Issues

    Memory stores the lessons we extract from learn life experience. And to do so, it relies, modifies, adds, subtracts, highlights, and hides.

    What about second-hand memories? Accounts of past events we didn’t experience ourselves, wars, volcano eruptions, scientific discoveries,…

    For knowledge to accumulate, to stand on the shoulders of giants, we need to transmit such lessons too. Not just as data or accounts of the past – also as memories.

    But transmitting second-hand memories require trust.

    Can we rely on the interpretation of others?

    Who do we allow to control the narrative?

    Parents? Elders? Teachers? Governments and politicians?

    YouTubers? Influencers? Bloggers? Twitter gurus?

    AI models and chatbots?

    Objective data doesn’t exist. Objective memories don’t exist either. So if we can’t trust second-hand memories anymore, collective memory and our whole learning model collapses.

  • #167 Worry or dream a thousand times

    I can worry a thousand times until my worries come true.

    I can envision my dreams a thousand times until my dreams come true.

    Not because of the act of worrying or the dreaming itself.

    But because my worries or dreams will incite different present actions taking me down different paths.

    Whatever future I focus on a thousand times, I’ll be drawn towards.

    Choose wisely.

  • |

    #136 Unoriginal thought

    If the storm ChatGPT is causing shows us one thing, it’s how unoriginal most of our thoughts are.

    AI builds on a massive library of what others have learned before.

    (Individual) humans build on a much smaller library of what others have learned before.

    If we merely do what others have done before, in some fields, AI has caught up to us already.

    What happens we build on what others have learned before, and combine it with what we learn ourselves (in other words, practice and skill building)?

    Now we’re talking about innovation: we’re doing things that haven’t been done before.

    And even then, one day, AI will possibly also innovate and do things that haven’t been done before.

    Sheer “processing power” is not a game we can win.

    The true question here:

    If raw intelligence and “brain processing power” isn’t what makes us truly, uniquely human, then what is?

  • | |

    #39 Knowledge transfer and time collapse

    Knowledge transfer always implies time collapse. Because learning an insight from someone else usually takes less long than figuring it out yourself.

    Take books. The writer usually spent considerable time researching and distilling the topic and coming to good insights (time I might not be able to dedicate).

    Thanks to that writer, I can now consume that knowledge in, say 6-12 hours of reading the book. A considerable time collapse…

    But when does time collapse go to far?

    Can I read a 1-page summary of that book and truly say I grasp the topic?

    When your brain gets space to breathe, knowledge grows and nuance shows. It needs time and repeated exposure to absorb information, make connections, and discover new insights.

    So a one-page summary isn’t necessarily too shallow… On the contrary: it collapses time so much that information becomes very dense.

    What with the evolution towards short-form online content? The primary purpose of TikTok videos and Instagram reels might be to entertain, but the trend is clear and spills over into education, our attention span, and knowledge transfer: shorter, more shallow, yet more dense.

    Too little time collapse and we can’t make progress.
    Too much time collapse and knowledge collapses with it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *