It's hard to say for sure, but I find the difference between "cold" recall and latent recall of facts to be pretty large. Happens most frequently with stuff I learned on Wikipedia: I'll end up in a conversation, find myself knowing a fact that I shouldn't really have known given my background, and then realized that I must've gotten it from Wikipedia. Sometimes after that I can mentally recreate the browsing path I must've used to get to the fact, even though I wouldn't have been able to explicitly list the article in question as one I remembered reading.

it's called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associative_memory (yeah, there's plenty of links spanning from that article, I know)

I think there's a whole cult that promotes learning all kinds of things by remembering by association, can't remember what it was called. My father was introduced to it when he tried to learn a new language, but it failed miserably at that (not all tools are suitable for everything).

Anyway, another good technique to recall something is to think about something else for a moment and not concentrate on a particular thing you can't recall at that moment too much.

I managed to memorize the forwards and backwards order of half a deck of cards the first time I tried using this book: http://www.amazon.com/How-Develop-Super-Power-Memory/dp/0811...

And then I promptly picked up a new book to half read after life distracted me for a week and I forgot about that one.

I sure hope you can't remember everything you read on HN. That would be like remembering everything that your roommate ever said to you during four years of college.

There's room in life for casual conversation. It doesn't have to be relentless study all the time. And even if you're intent on only reading stuff worth memorizing you can't achieve that goal. You can fight Sturgeon's Law, but you can't always expect to win.

I don't see a serious problem with a low retention rate from reading HN articles. I do not come here to memorize every item that flies through... I probably read 50 items a week on HN, but the reason I come back is for the 2-3 items per week that make me re-evaluate what I am doing, and cause me to do it better.

I've had a similar observation with all of my RSS feeds. Afterward, I dropped about 80% of them. And wow did that feel good! Strange how it becomes a weight after a while. I also reduced my HN reading to just a few top posts a day.

What keeps me coming back to HN is my ongoing curiosity of how technology is evolving. (And also a slight paranoia of another hacker publishing exactly one of my side projects before I do :) I enjoy being engaged with other like minded strangers. And I believe this place helps you better predict, even appreciate the direction of technology.

Just so long as you have balance and it doesn't keep you from actually getting things done. As for the article's point, I do agree. Doing something is immeasurably more beneficial for you than reading about it.

An over-loaded RSS feed, or being subscribed to too many mailing lists has an effect similar to what PG is talking about in his "stuff" essay.

http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html

George Carlin had similar thoughts:

"A Place for My Stuff" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvgN5gCuLac

I started writing notes if I thought it was worth remembering. Too often I'd read the article and then later try to discuss it with someone and forget simple facts. I realized I'm not even learning anything, just temporarily distracting my mind with 'shiny' factoids and stories. Basically the same as looking at imgur all day. I also try to focus what I read and follow only things that relate to my job, projects and 1 or 2 hobby interests.

I find the articles interesting, that is enough for me to justify reading HN. When I compare HN to the front page of reddit, which I used to read, I feel a lot better about reading HN.

I would also claim you want to 'relax' during breaks, that is, not actively think about something. I can't think of many better activities then reading HN.