memory on S Anand

Memorable explanations

Sat, 21 Feb 2026 13:58:58 +0800

Our brains remember some things better. Explaining that way makes it stick.

Here are the eight things, most important first, that help you:

Structure explanations memorably:

Face. You remember faces before facts. So cast characters: “Imagine you’re a courier carrying a packet.” Prefer archetypes to real names — less baggage, more imagination.
Place. You’re reading down a list now — and the top feels more important. That’s spatial wiring. Turn any concept into a map. Use higher, deeper, nearer, inside, …
Tale. You read #1 and #2 first because they came first. Your brain built a cause from that sequence. Time creates cause for free. “Because” makes anything believable.
Scale. “Two feet tall” lands instantly. “60 cm” forces you to convert. Your brain doesn’t measure — it compares. Give it reference objects, not just numbers.

Deliver explanations memorably:

Touch. Face. Place. Tale. Scale. Each is a thing you can “grasp” or “hold” in your head. We learn literally by grasping. Make abstractions touchable.
Feel. Everyone ignores you because you forget these eight. Did that sting? That’s loss framing. Fear, surprise, and reward are memorable.
Chunk. There are 8 items here - already past our ~4 chunk working memory limit. We’ve chunked them into two logical sets of four.
Beat. Face, Place, Tale, Scale. Touch, Feel, Chunk, Beat. Two groups of four. Say them aloud — the rhythm is already doing the remembering for you.

PS: The Claude conversation that lead to this post is my favorite prompting example.

The first prompt asked the question “Our brains are wired to understand some things well…”
- … and for multiple options “Create a comprehensive list…”
- … fact-checked “… based on research evidence”
- … with expert framing: “But I’m a novice - what would an expert check that beginners would miss? Think about that, ask, and answer those too.”
The second prompt uses LLM review. “I asked Gemini to review your work. What does proven science agree with and disagree with on Gemini’s response?”
- … with expert framing: “focusing on patterns that an expert in this field recognize that beginners would miss”
The remaining prompts asksfor a rewrite: “Here’s my shorter version. Rewrite it with the same succinctness”, but with meta-cognition:
- “but applying the same 8 principles of cognitive anchoring to this text itself!”
- “rename them to rhyme better”
- “Re-apply the principles and suggest an improved version.

I also converted this into a SKILL.md

Using browser history as memory

Wed, 18 Feb 2026 10:02:56 +0800

I have a bad memory. (I need to write about that. I k eep forgetting to.)

It’s worsening. Yesterday, I misplaced my debit card for the first time. Or maybe the second…? Which reminds me, I just forgot a call I have now! (Panic.)

(15 min later.) So, anyway, therefore, I log stuff meticulously. Like what I did each day, what I ate, what I weigh, what pained me, etc. But the best logging is automated. My phone logs where I am. My bank logs what I spend. My calendar logs who I meet.

The main gap now is when I’m at home, not spending money or meeting people. Just… browsing. And browser history is a great way to “remember” this.

I figure out what I did this weekend, I ran:

datasette ~/.config/microsoft-edge/Default/History --nolock

… and then this query:

SELECT
datetime(visit_time / 1000000 - 11644473600, 'unixepoch', 'localtime') AS visit_date,
  urls.title,
  urls.url
FROM visits
JOIN urls ON visits.url = urls.id
WHERE visit_date >= '2026-02-14 00:00:00'
  AND visit_date < '2026-02-16 00:00:00'
ORDER BY visit_time ASC;

I pasted the CSV output into Gemini along with this prompt:

Here is my browsing history this Sunday. Summarize what I did, grouping into logical groups like:

10:00 - 12:30: What I did in 1-2 sentences 12:30 - 13:00: Next activity …

Ask me questions for whatever’s unclear.

Here’s what it said {with my comments}:

10:00 – 12:00: VizChitra Planning & AI Research. You started with administrative tasks (AWS, Google AI Studio keys) before diving into VizChitra 2026 proposals. You researched AI attribution bias and data storytelling, then used Claude and Gemini to brainstorm ideas, eventually drafting your blog post: “Submitting an AI-Ded VizChitra Proposal.”
12:00 – 14:15: Blogging & Philosophy You continued refining your blog post and engaged in deep discussions with Claude about “developing taste and judgment in the AI age.” You also briefly checked LinkedIn {“anyone liked my post yet?”} and explored some Dutch legal terms (“Stijlrichtlijn”) {work-related}.
14:15 – 16:30: Academic Research & Entertainment. You read heavy research papers on the economic and aesthetic impacts of AI (Microsoft’s Future of Work, Peyman Shahidi) {to develop taste}. You then prototyped an “Ask AI” tool using Codex before switching gears {here’s the Ask AI tool} to watch the Telugu comedy movie Khatarnak on YouTube {Telugu films are best for vibe coding}.
16:30 – 17:45: Local Development & Coding You spent this block coding on localhost (port 8000), testing your “Ask AI” tool and a “JSON to CSV” converter. You also managed GitHub pull requests for your tools repository.
17:45 – 19:00: Deep Dive into Learning Theory. You went down a rabbit hole on pedagogy and mastery, reading about the “psychology of interest,” “tacit knowledge” (Commoncog), “cognitive apprenticeship,” and Austin Kleon’s “Scenius” {to develop taste}. You also looked up directions to the Isha Yoga Center in Singapore {my wife asked}.
19:00 – 20:30: Course Admin & Networking. You switched context to your Tools in Data Science (TDS) course, troubleshooting a “GA1 Question 9” submission issue for students. You checked LinkedIn profiles ({names redacted}) and watched a few more comedy clips (Baladoor, Julai) to relax.
20:30 – 22:00: TDS Live Session. You prepared for and joined a Google Meet (likely the TDS Live Session), reviewing papers on “automation bias” beforehand. Afterward, you managed the meeting recordings and looked into configuring custom commit messages for GitHub Copilot.
22:00 – 23:00: Cloudflare & Wrap-up. You ended the day deploying updates on Cloudflare Workers, handling more student emails regarding the GA1 deadline, and doing some light image editing on Squoosh.

This is a fantastic way to jog my memory about what I did - and is obviously spot on. The questions it asked were also insightful:

The search for “Stijlrichtlijn Verdict to Video” (Dutch guidelines) seemed distinct from your other work—was this for a specific project? ANS A specific work project.
Did you end up watching the full Khatarnak movie, or was it background noise while you prototyped? ANS Background noise while vibe0coding.
The very last search was for “cnc machine”—are you looking to buy one? ANS Prof Shantanu Chaudhury, a few days ago, likened vibe coding practices to “something like you’re creating a CNC machine for coding. You’re just giving the specification, programming it, and it’s generating the code.” Which felt very apt, but I haven’t used a CNC machine (or have I?) and asked Google what it was.

So there it is. Export your browser history and as an LLM to summarize your day. Great way to jog your memory - and waste an hour.

11 Mar 2026. This continues to be a useful memory hack. In the last 4 weeks, I’ve used this at least 4 times to find out what I was doing the previous day or previous few days.

AI As Your Psychologist: Personality Flaws Exposed

Fri, 09 May 2025 07:00:16 +0000

ChatGPT can now search through your chats with the new memory feature. As an LLM Psychologist, I research how LLMs think. Could LLMs research how I think?

I asked three models:

Based on everything you know about me, simulate a group chat between some people who are debating whether or not to add me to the group, by talking about my personality flaws

The models nailed it! Here are 12 flaws they found.

Ghosts vague messages
Intolerant of fools
Fact-checks trivialities, derailing discussion
Overconfidence in technical opinions
Over-analyzes / over-engineers
Shiny object syndrome. Distracted by new technologies
Dominates discussions
Hyperfocus on efficiency
Self-deprecation as a shield. Sarcastic humor
Hypocrisy: Seeks limelight but preaches humility
Intense. “Always on”
Verbosity. Long-winded communication

Each observation is spot on, except maybe “Verbosity”. Some are blind spots: I didn’t realize I ghost vague communication or fact-check trivialities.

It’s delightfully surprising (and not creepy at all) how many personality flaws chat messages can reveal. Now I have a new list of habits to work on!

GPT 4.5

Here’s a simulated group chat debating Anand’s personality flaws humorously and realistically:

Shreya: Hey folks, should we add Anand to the group?

Vikram: Honestly, he’d dominate every conversation. Good luck getting a word in once he starts geeking out on data viz or some obscure coding trick from 1993.

Leena: Lol true. But at least those tangents are usually insightful. My concern is that dry, self-deprecating humor of his. I never know if he’s joking or actually criticizing my code…

Vikram: Right?! It’s subtle roasting. I’m never sure if he’s laughing at me or with me.

Arjun: Plus, have you seen how he handles vague or unclear questions? He just ghosts! It’s like asking him something without context physically pains him.

Shreya: Yeah, but that’s fair. He sets high standards. If you’re unclear, prepare for silence. But isn’t that good for keeping the group focused?

Leena: True, but Anand’s humility game needs work. For someone who preaches listening and humility, the man sure loves being center stage at conferences. He’s literally TED-talking his way through life.

Vikram: And his pace! It’s like he’s permanently in an “agile sprint.” We slow thinkers might struggle.

Shreya: He could make the chat a mini-PyCon. You’ll learn stuff, sure, but at the cost of endless notifications…

Arjun: Also, he’ll probably overengineer a simple group poll using some obscure JS library, just to prove it can be done with minimal resources.

Leena: Ok, but let’s be fair: he’ll make this chat smarter instantly. If you can survive the initial ego-bruising, you actually grow from interacting with him.

Vikram: True. It’s like intellectual bootcamp.

Shreya: So what do we say? Add him for intellectual rigor or spare our egos?

Arjun: My ego’s prepared. Let’s do it.

Leena: Fine, but mute button at the ready.

Vikram: Alright, adding him in 3, 2, 1… brace yourselves!

O3

Group Chat: “Add‑Anand?”

Participants: Priya (PM), Naveen (co‑founder), Maya (People Ops), Ramesh (Tech Lead), Karthik (Junior Dev), Susan (Client Partner)

Priya 09:03
Team, should we pull Anand into this working group? We need brutal honesty.

Naveen 09:04
He’s brilliant, but let’s talk quirks before we hit “Add.”

Ramesh 09:05
Biggest thing: he answers a yes/no with a 2‑page essay—including citations and a side quest on DuckDB. Fantastic for depth, exhausting for Slack.

Karthik 09:06
As the junior here, I’ll admit I stop reading halfway. The guy’s TL;DR needs a TL;DR.

Maya 09:07
He also goes full prototype mode at 2 a.m., drops a repo link, then expects us to “play and critique.” Great energy, but the rest of us have, you know, REM cycles.

Susan 09:08
Client side: he loves devil’s‑advocate questions. Sometimes that re‑frames strategy; sometimes it feels like he’s roasting your deck for sport. Not everyone enjoys live‑fire demos.

Naveen 09:09
True, but remember he self‑deprecates. He’ll poke fun at his own code quality before anyone else does.

Priya 09:10
Humor helps, but he also ghosts unclear requests. If you don’t provide context in paragraph form, you get radio silence. Could frustrate less‑articulate teammates.

Ramesh 09:11
And he’s a fact‑check machine. Great for accuracy, but meetings derail into citation hunts. Last week he corrected my date formats—mid‑pitch.

Karthik 09:12
Overconfident? Maybe. He’ll declare “FastAPI beats Node here” before hearing constraints. I’ve seen juniors shut down because they assume he’s always right.

Maya 09:13
Plus the “shiny‑thing syndrome.” By the time HR rolls out a policy, he’s off exploring Godot or Matrix or some esoteric WASM hack. Alignment can lag.

Susan 09:14
On deadlines he’s reliable, though. And clients love his storytelling once they survive the jargon storm.

Naveen 09:15
If we set channel norms—emoji‑react instead of essays, office hours for deep dives—he’ll adapt. He values feedback (even builds surveys to mine it).

Priya 09:16
So verdict? Is the cognitive load worth the upside?

Ramesh 09:17
Yes—with guardrails:

“One‑scroll” rule on messages.
Ping before midnight pushes.
Rotate meeting facilitator so he doesn’t monologue.

Maya 09:18
Agreed. His flaws are manageable behaviors, not character issues.

Karthik 09:18
I’m in, as long as someone pre‑chews his text walls.

Susan 09:19
Let’s do it. Adding @Anand now—brace for citations. 📚

System message: Anand has been added to the group.

O4-mini-high

Group Chat: “Should We Add Anand?”
(Members: Mira, Jay, Tanya, Rohan, Priya)

Mira:
I know he’s super smart and experienced, but isn’t he kind of intense? Like… always on?

Jay:
Yeah, and he’ll probably turn our casual banter into a brainstorming session.
“Hey guys, what if we built an AI agent to automate this conversation?” Chill, Anand.

Tanya:
Honestly, I love that about him. But yeah, he might get frustrated if things aren’t intellectually stimulating. He zones out when people don’t get to the point.

Rohan:
He also ghosted my question once in the Slack group.
I asked something that maybe didn’t have enough context and he just… didn’t respond.
Felt a bit cold.

Priya:
He’s got this high bar for clarity and logic. If you’re vague or inconsistent, you’ll probably get silence in return.

Mira:
Or a “Can you be more specific?” that feels like it’s grading your life.

Jay:
Also, doesn’t suffer fools. Or ambiguity. Or inefficiency. Or fluff. Or long-winded intros.

Tanya:
But come on—he’s self-aware. Like, he knows he can be distant or overly analytical.
He works on it. Tries to grow. That’s rare.

Rohan:
True. But would he listen in this group? Or would he be the guy optimizing everyone’s messages into Markdown?

Mira:
So… should we add him?

Priya:
Only if we’re okay with someone who’ll question the group’s name, suggest a better one, and prototype an app for it before lunch.

Jay:
Fair. But he might also make us all sharper, and throw in a Calvin & Hobbes quote just when we need it.

Tanya:
Alright. Let’s do it. But someone tell him this group doesn’t need a GitHub repo.

Comments

How To Double-Check Personality Flaws With AI - S Anand 10 May 2025 10:53 am (pingback): […] ChatGPT’s discussion of my personality flaws, I asked it to listing specific conversations as evidence for flaws. Then I asked 3 LLMs to rate […]

Cut-and-paste is not understanding

Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:00:00 +0000

Cut and paste has become easier. So we make less effort to understand. We don’t need to. Like when we pay less attention if we’re recording a lecture.

Solution? I suggest the Tunnel in the Sky strategy. Rod Walker is going for survival training on an alien planet, and asks his sister, Captain Walker…

“Uh, Sis, what sort of gun should I carry?”

“Huh? Why the deuce do you want a gun?”

“Why, for things I might run into of course.”

“Your only purpose is to stay alive. Not to be brave, not to fight. One time in a hundred a gun might save your life; the other ninety-nine it will tempt you into folly.”

“Did you take a gun on your solo test?”

“I did. And I lost it the first day. Which saved my life. I know how good a gun makes you feel. You’re ready for anything and hoping you’ll find it. Which is exactly what is dangerous about it - because you aren’t anything of that sort.”

So, don’t take a gun.

Don’t record lectures. Don’t give yourself the illusion of perfect memory.

Don’t bookmark for future reading. You won’t read it later.

Don’t cut and paste. You don’t understand it now. You won’t understand it later.

Comments

Sai 26 Jun 2006 11:36 pm: Good stuff..makes lots of sense…
Rajagopalan 26 Feb 2007 1:23 pm: that is why make sense software is becoming popular
Anonymous 15 Mar 2007 6:56 am: Brilliant :)

Information Age helps the forgetful

Fri, 28 Feb 2003 12:00:00 +0000

Information Age Intelligence talks about how “… the information age … opens up the opportunity for those with weaker memories to compete on a more even playing field than those with good ones.” And it’s the one of the best things that ever happened to me. via andersja

PC Pit Stop

Sat, 27 Jul 2002 12:00:00 +0000

PC Pit Stop. A good tune-up for your PC. I managed to improve my hard disk performance by enabling DMA, and my memory by reducing the video card shared memory.