?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

rewritable memory

I realized I have some kind of rewritable memory in my head, today. New bits of information can sometimes replace old ones. That's contrary to everything I know about neurology--which may not be a whole lot. But anyway:

My old insurance company wanted to verify that I was me over the phone. I needed to get a refund check for the money they billed me after I cancelled. They asked for my name, birthdate, email, and home address all at once. A rattled them off one at a time until I got to my address. Then I was like... uh, well it's not the same anymore. So he says "okay, just give me your old address. That's what we have here." Me: "um. I'm sorry, I can't remember it." Him: "How long has it been since you moved?" Me: "Almost 3 months. I already updated my address in my mind, the old one is gone. Sorry." Actually, after he gave me a hint... what it started with, I was able to recall it. But it's still interesting to think that maybe brains are somewhat rewritable--in other words, that you can have a bin where a piece of dynamic information is stored, and that information can be overwritten. Like maybe, that's how we know what day of the week it is or what year it is... hmmm. Then again, I could just be a freak.

On another note... I did the whole DMV thing today. I played it smart and got there at 8am, only had to wait for about 3 people. The only thing that pissed me off about the whole thing was, they marked one of my answers wrong on the driving test which I don't agree with. Apparently, they either don't understand basic logic, or they think that it's okay to go through a red light as long as you stop first.

Comments

( 12 comments — Leave a comment )
troyworks
Nov. 15th, 2003 11:46 pm (UTC)
makes sense though, we've had to move locations for a long period of time (was it the big oak tree and turn left, or the pine tree and turn right to get to food:shelter:water:sex:etc) The memories aren't gone -you were still able to recall the old address when given a snippet of it-it's just that the priming mechanism has shifted to trigger the one most used as it should. Imagine a scenario when your trying to run and get water/fire, if you got confused between home last night one or home tonight if your nomadic) you wouldn't survive very long

*blinking* red light you stop and go. Solid red lights can act as a stop sign (if the traffic signal isn't workign) =proceed only when safe,
spoonless
Nov. 16th, 2003 11:38 am (UTC)

makes sense though, we've had to move locations for a long period of time (was it the big oak tree and turn left, or the pine tree and turn right to get to food:shelter:water:sex:etc) The memories aren't gone -you were still able to recall the old address when given a snippet of it-it's just that the priming mechanism has shifted to trigger the one most used as it should. Imagine a scenario when your trying to run and get water/fire, if you got confused between home last night one or home tonight if your nomadic) you wouldn't survive very long

Yeah, very good point. I think it's not that the actual information is really overwritten, it's more like a pointer to it is lost or redirected. Gee... makes me wonder if we have garbage collection to clean up the lost bits later. Maybe given enough time :)


*blinking* red light you stop and go. Solid red lights can act as a stop sign (if the traffic signal isn't workign) =proceed only when safe,

It specifically said solid red light.

Here was the actual question:

What is the difference between traffic lights with red arrows and those with solid red lights?

a.) Red arrows are only used to stop traffic which is turning left.
b.) Red arrows are only used for protected turn lanes
c.) You cannot turn against a red arrow, even if you stop first.

I said it was a... which I still think is correct. But they said it was c. To me, c clearly implies that you can turn left at a solid red light if you stop first. That's not the difference... the difference is that you're allowed to go straight through a red arrow but not through a solid red light. The only way I thought I might have been wrong is if they only had red arrows in certain lanes (in which case b would be right) but driving home from the test I went right through a red arrow without stopping as did all the other traffic, since it was not a turn-only lane. So I think they either just made a mistake in grading it or they're just dumb.
troyworks
Nov. 16th, 2003 06:46 pm (UTC)
Yeah I was going to mention pointers.

The answer is C. They didn't make a mistake and they aren't dumb, you thinking of different models. While your case is probably more frequent in your world, Red arrows are frequently used to stop traffic from turning RIGHT, e.g. double turn lanes merging with larger traffic, or entryways onto highways, that may be getting traffic from many directions (including ones you can't see the signal from) say an X intersection where traffic from 3 sides is routed to one other.

Here's the scenarios they are trying to get you to see.

Scenario 1: Normal T insersection with a normal stoplight on it you are coming from the base of the T. By default if the Light is red you can turn right provided you stop and check that traffic from the Left can be merged with safely.

I don't believe you can turn left on the red in this case as you have to cross one or more lanes of traffic and merge with one or more lanes rather than just merge.

Scenario 2 same intersection. This time with the addition of a red arrow to the RIGHT. This overrides the normal stop behavior and says this a dangerous intersection with either deceptively high speed traffic that can't be merged with or mulitple turn lanes that requires protected turns, so just wait.

Hope that makes sense.
spoonless
Nov. 16th, 2003 09:09 pm (UTC)
Well I'll be damned! I could have sworn it said left arrow, I guess I was just picturing left without realizing it said it. Good thing I typed it in directly from the sheet instead of from memory, or I know I would have put left in there.

Well, I guess that clears that up... thanks. Now the weird thing is, I don't have anything left to complain about. So it's actually possible to go to the DMV and have nothing go wrong! Incredible. I had a similar shock when I got my first electric bill here--only $12. I was used to everyone ranting about the insanely high energy costs here, and I've paid under $15 for both months so far. Way, way cheaper than where I came from--phone and internet are both cheaper too.
troyworks
Nov. 16th, 2003 09:27 pm (UTC)
the one question that got me was turning right when there is a bicycle lane. It's legal as you get to closer to the stop sign to enter this normally protected space in order to turn right.


Dual turn lanes are also a bit wierd, and to be honest I don't rember what the correct answers were e.g. if two left turn lanes have anno oncoming traffic and green light is okay to turn left onto a two lane sidestreet? and i don't remeber the answer.

Driving a hill with one car road, and two cars meet going opposite directions, which one has the right of way/shoud yeild to the other? I think it was the one going downhill, as it's much harder to drive in reverse uphill.
cosmicpep
Nov. 16th, 2003 12:16 am (UTC)
Mutable memory
I've thought about memory a lot. Here's the story:

I was in several plays when I was at GaTech. So I memorized a *lot* of lines. If you've ever been in a play, you know. You memorize the lines. I stressed over memorizing the lines, because inflection, delivery, nothing at all matters if you stand up on stage in front of a hundred people and can't remember what you're supposed to say.

Before performances, in the green room, I'd stand around with my co-performers idly rehearsing the lines while getting dressed. If I heard something similar to my cue, even on the street, I'd think of my response line.

Then, in the strike party (the big party held after the last play) for The Miser (which I had performed that night), someone was laughing, joking, asking me about some line in the play. I couldn't recall it!!!

So, in the end, the very minute I didn't have to know the lines any more, I completely erased them from my brain.

Eh, just my 2 cents.
spoonless
Nov. 16th, 2003 11:18 am (UTC)
alumni
Whoa, you went to GaTech? Me too! How did you find my journal? I was involved in LTT (formerly called LTTP) at Tech, so I knew a fair amount of Dramatech ppl, at least for a 2-year period. What year did you graduate? I was there from '95 to '02, studying computer engineering and physics.

I went to a strike party one time, it was lots of fun.
cosmicpep
Nov. 16th, 2003 11:56 am (UTC)
Re: alumni
Damn, small small world!

I found your journal through the "physics" community; I commented on your question about Lorenz vs. Lorentz.

I went to GT from 92-96, studied physics, and did stuff with Dramatech ~ 95-97 or so. Surely you know Wes S., and maybe you know Haw C, whom I go to grad school with now (he did LTT similar era).
spoonless
Nov. 16th, 2003 02:59 pm (UTC)
Re: alumni

I found your journal through the "physics" community; I commented on your question about Lorenz vs. Lorentz.

Oh yeah. I knew I recognized your icon from somewhere, just couldn't remember where.

I went to GT from 92-96, studied physics, and did stuff with Dramatech ~ 95-97 or so. Surely you know Wes S., and maybe you know Haw C, whom I go to grad school with now (he did LTT similar era).

I didn't get involved with dt till 1999. But yeah, Wes was still there almost every week. I don't know whatever happened to him, I assume he's graduated by now (I remember he had to apply for the "10 year rule" at one point, to get his freshman classes to count). I didn't know Haw, but I may have heard the name mentioned once or twice.

On the physics side of things, did you by any chance know Jason Hancock? He was there getting his physics bs from '94 - '98. He's here with me now at UC Santa Cruz, finishing up his PhD. There's also an Asian guy here named Fred that was there at some point, and a friend of Jason's named Glen. Ever run into any of these guys?
gustavolacerda
Nov. 16th, 2003 03:01 am (UTC)
hey, even my LOGIC ASSIGNMENT has an ambiguous reading.


"C_G phi holds at every world reachable via any finite chain of uncertainty relations for actors in G."

(did you mean EVERY finite chain? every = for all, any = there exists)
spoonless
Nov. 16th, 2003 11:22 am (UTC)
I thought:

for every = for any = for all ,

and

for some = there exists
spoonless
Nov. 16th, 2003 11:25 am (UTC)
nevermind, I guess it depends on context. The any in your assignment does look like it means "there exists".

I was thinking of something like "for any integer with blah blah, there exists blah blah blah..."
( 12 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

blueshirt
spoonless
domino plural

Latest Month

May 2017
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lizzy Enger