- The article claims that the forgetting of 90% is an underrated problem. I think it’s generally a feature that enables us to converse, read stories, and live. It’s a garbage collector. More specifically, however, it gets in the way when we learn new things. You read something important, have an aha moment, but then forget it a minute later when your short-term memory gets refilled. And so you need to run into the same important thing multiple times before it really sticks with you.
- The article claims that the time element is of upmost importance. I think it’s important only in very specific cases, and generally unimportant. The passing of time also makes the value of it decay.
- The article claims that new notes are better than re-working old ones. I feel the opposite is my preference. You re-work your knowledge, review, correct, and restructure it. What matters is your current understanding, not how you arrived there, or what your 0.1 version was. The art is in simplification and distillation over time, not accumulation.