Yea using the analogy of the eyes can see the entire document
Vs
I need to memorise everything as it’s spoken out, and then answer on it
Is a good approximate on the difference.
The kicker though as people pointed out, there are individuals on earth who can memorise things to great length. So the same will apply here (need more training)
It’s also why it is recommended by the community to ask the question first, then put your context document. In a document QnA task
In the shower today I was thinking about Jungian archetypes as a visual programming language for the subconscious.
For example, if someone says, "I should be a better mother", and hold this impression in their mind over time, the associations their brain makes with that image and various behaviors can be used as a guiding force during the physical reorganization which occurs when one creates a new habit, or adjusts a behavior or muscle memory.
And these associations depend upon observations made by the individual, which they have either been taught or innately know can be categorized as mother-like. The brain is typically trained to make this association in the case of the mother by mirroring and attaching to the first female who exhibits nursing behavior. These archetypes are a visual representation of deeper mental models which we are primed to carry on between generations.
And then I wondered how this might apply to neural models, if some system of archetypes naturally emerges, if they're useful for programming or memorization/compression, or how we might explore imbuing existing models with an archetypical system.
Vs
I need to memorise everything as it’s spoken out, and then answer on it
Is a good approximate on the difference.
The kicker though as people pointed out, there are individuals on earth who can memorise things to great length. So the same will apply here (need more training)
It’s also why it is recommended by the community to ask the question first, then put your context document. In a document QnA task