Readit NewsWhen working on art projects, my trick is to specifically give all feedback constructively, carefully avoiding framing things in terms of the inverse or parts to remove.
It’s another example of something that isn’t really correct for everyone but can be useful to get people to go to a therapist and get treatment.
I almost never see someone talk about free recall so I was too excited to see it mentioned not to comment
More fundamentally, SRS isn't a superpower because it's just very specific to creating a direct prompt retrieval. Generalization is poor. Even creating a graph of knowledge, is a chain of edges between bits of knowledge, isn't done very well here.
And I suspect there's a very deep, fundamental difference between recollection knowledge and logical-modeling knowledge. Recollection seems very similar to a dictionary access, and if you recorded the time to recall in humans I suspect they'd all be constant. But learning the knowledge of a logical model, like of a mathematical concept, appears to be vastly different and have very different time to compute.
Proponents of SRS will point out logical models need facts as well, like formulas, lemmas, etc. Which is true. But if you already grasped it before you'd grasp it faster the second time. So the practical use of SRS is a significant step above having a very well sorted and labeled notebook, but still way below becoming a genius.
There's 2 solutions I've thought of but haven't tried implementing:
1. A free-recall based approach. Free recall allows you to operate at a higher level of organization and connect concepts at lower levels. However, how you would schedule SRS with free recall is not clear.
2. Have an LLM generate questions on-the-fly so that you don't overtrain on prompts. You might also instruct the LLM to create questions that connect multiple concepts together. The problem with this approach is that LLMs are still not so good at creating good test questions.
From shadowgovt:
> I have seen no literature on whether having fetal RBCs in adulthood has any benefits or drawbacks (besides changing the affinity ratio for their fetus if the patient gets pregnant
This was exactly the question that popped into my mind when I read about switching from normal adult RBCs to fetal RBCs: does this therapy reduce the likelihood of carrying a baby to term?
One of the treatments for sickle-cell involves switching off the gene that makes the malfunctioning red blood cells, but of course that's not sufficient; you'd stop making red blood cells completely and you'd die. So it's combined with a modification that switches on a gene that all humans express pre-birth that causes your body to make "super-blood": red blood cells with significantly more binding points for oxygen. This is necessary because a fetus gets oxygen from its mother's blood, so the increased binding affinity is useful for pulling the oxygen towards the fetus at the placental interface. After birth, expression of that gene is disabled and regular RBC genes switch on.
So the therapy doesn't "fix" sickle RBCs; it disables the body's ability to make them and re-enables fetal RBCs! I have seen no literature on whether having fetal RBCs in adulthood has any benefits or drawbacks (besides changing the affinity ratio for their fetus if the patient gets pregnant, I imagine increased-affinity RBC could help for athletics... But I also imagine it requires more iron to generate them so has dietary impact).
Most of the time the doctor doesn't know the exact pathogen you are infected with. He'll suspect a bacterian infection of some kind and prescribe a wide range antibiotic.
Doing what you suggest will require changing the way we do medicine. Which might not be a bad thing but requires some determination.
Like it or not, you (yes, you) are a slave to your internal chemistry. No amount of willpower or happy thoughts will cause your hormones or neurotransmitter levels into the homeostasis you want. If your chemistry is off, your physical and emotional behavior will be off.
You are a sentient pile of molecular machines ticking along because the chemistry happens to work out. There is nothing special about you, you're exactly like every other plant, animal, and fungus on this planet.
So yes, plenty of mental, behavioral, and physical disorders arise from chemical imbalances. If you take this fact, consider what happens when you indtroduce foreign and extremely powerful chemicals into such a complex organic system.
If you come back with the assertion that addiction is a question of willpower, you didn't understand the assignment.
Behavioral-only therapies are effective, even if they're not as effective as we'd like. We have the ability to modulate our own chemistry.
After a few moves they get hopelessly lost and just start wandering back and forth in a loop. Even when I prompt them explicitly to serialize a state representation of the maze after each step, and even if I prune the old context so they don't get tripped up on old state representations, they still get flustered and corrupt the state or lose track of things eventually.
They get the concept: if I explain the challenge and ask to write a program to solve such a maze step-by-step like that, they can do that successfully first-try! But maintaining it internally, they still seem to struggle.
* https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009286742...