News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The growing science of memory manipulation by js2 on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:40AM (#20866348)
We’ve got these small pottery bowls I really like. One day, I noticed there only seemed to be two of them. I asked my spouse what happened to the other two. She replied that we only ever owned two. I said, no that can’t be right, I’m certain we had four. She insisted only two. A while later I found a third. I went to her and said, ah ha, see, three bowls! Where did the fourth go?

And do you know what she says? “We’ve only ever had three.”

It’s been many months now, maybe a year, and there’s still only three, but hand to god, I’m going to find that fourth bowl.

I still can’t get a straight answer out of her why she’s so certain there were only ever three when she was just as certain there were only ever two until confronted with the physical reality of three bowls.

Now she thinks this is about being right, but I insist it isn’t. It’s the unsettling idea that my memory isn’t correct.

I may just have to let this one go... :-)

Re:The growing science of memory manipulation by Swizec on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:46AM (#20866387)
3 is an awkward number of bowls so there definitely used to be 4. Dishware usually comes in multiples of 2
Re:The growing science of memory manipulation by js2 on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:59AM (#20866504)
I’ve argued that point. We think we got them at a pottery tent at the state fair where they may have been in bulk and we just purchased three, but I don’t know why we would have bought an odd number.
Re:The growing science of memory manipulation by mortenjorck on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @12:39PM (#20868349)
I have fun from time to time attempting to reconcile divergent memories, so allow me to hypothesize one possible scenario:

There were only three available at the fair. You would normally only buy bowls in a set of four. However, as you mention, you really like this particular style. Perhaps you liked it so much that you made an exception in this case and bought the three because that was the maximum available. But then you lost the third, and so the memories you were triangulating from were "there are two in the cupboard," "that's not the full set," and "four is a full set."

Now onto your spouse's memory. They remembered two at first, because they were triangulating between "we normally buy four," "there are fewer than four of these," and "we always buy an even number." Confronted with the existence of a third, the other memory, "there are fewer than four" remains in effect.

Re:The growing science of memory manipulation by everdrive on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @12:01PM (#20867907)
Tell your wife that her gaslighting isn't nearly interesting enough.
Re:The growing science of memory manipulation by hyperpallium on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @10:33AM (#20866833)
She always said there were three.