In the article 'As We May Think' Vannevar Bush [[@bushWeMayThink1945|(1945)]] coins the term **memex**, standing for '**mem**ory **ex**pansion'. He proposes it as a device that can store a large amount of information, such as books and communications which can be accessed quickly and flexibility. Therefore, the memex would expand the available memory that the individual can use in their research and reasoning processes. He aimed for the memex to store and present information in a manner that mimicked the associative processes of the mind, where 'selection by association, rather than by indexing, may yet be mechanized', like the links in this [[Personal wiki|personal wiki]]. Whilst this may sound obvious now, the memex was a precursor to the: personal computer, world wide web, hypertext, search engines, online encyclopaedias, [[Personal knowledge management system|personal knowledge management systems]] and more. ## Supporting cognition We need to be clear about the meaning of [[Memory|memory]], where here we are concerned with: 1. Human long-term associative memories 2. Computational representations -> interpreted into human working memory Bush posits the supplemental utility that a memex could provide: 'One cannot hope thus to equal the speed and flexibility with which the mind follows an associative trail, but it should be possible to beat the mind decisively in regard to the permanence and clarity of the items resurrected from storage' [[@bushWeMayThink1945|(1945)]]. Now let's take a closer look at the two positive claims of a memex: permanence and clarity. * **Permanence,** whilst the memory is permanent in computational representation, human memory is constantly changing and where meaning needs to be reconstructed from text in a time-consuming manner whenever they wish to reason upon. That is, the only form of true meaning can be seen as that which is constructed within the mind in all its associative messiness where permanence is an illusion. * **Clarity,** similarly is questionable given that meaning is constructed in the mind. Though topics related to positivist fields carrying well-defined objective knowledge that has utility in the manner in which it is applied retains a sense of clarity, whilst information that exists within the subjectivities of non-positivist domains are interpreted in a variety of meaning that makes the notion of clarity questionable. This may be the problem with the increasing use of [[Personal knowledge management system|personal knowledge management systems]], , [[Second brain|second brain]], LLMs, search, and more, which outsources increasing levels of cognition. Memory is not like computers where it is simply a delay of loaded information but retains a consistent form, but the way in which meaning is constructed forms the basis of its utility in the pursuit of creativity and reason. That is not to say that permanence and clarity are not worthwhile pursuits, but rather they could be improved in ways that support human cognition! This could be through the use of [[Incremental reading|incremental reading]] and [[Spaced repetition|spaced repetition]] as [[Piotr Woźniak]] discusses [here](https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Inevitability_of_incremental_reading). I can't help but fall in love with this bold and unconventional statement he makes: 'Instead of molding Internet protocols to incorporate spaced repetition, we opted for molding user's experience'. At first glance it seems crazy, but is it? --- TODO * Clean up the last part, maybe give better definitions on permanence and clarity, break it apart also with respect to the goal of the memory - is it for utility related application, creativity, etc ... creativity would have much higher demands on the necessity to memorise as a way of making connections. * Expand the last quote about internet protocols being for user experience, into its own thought ...