Who would ever want a memory implant? - Total Recall (1990) Discussion

[–] aavfreak (3056) 2 years ago

I also think that the idea of having a memory implanted a dumb idea. It would be different if there were a virtual experience (indistinguishable from real life) that you lived through in real time, but having a memory of something you never really did? Dumb.

The other thing is that I'm cynical and skeptical by nature. So, if they are implanting these false memories, what else are they putting in there? Do I know what's a real memory of my life experience and what's not?

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

I think you will not know the difference. Like an idiot that really thinks he is Napoleon.

reply

[–] kenburke (2323) 2 years ago

It would take watching a television show or a movie to the next level.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

That is nothing like watching anything.
It is actually NOT watching it nor experiencing it.

It is the life equivalent of a movie spoiler.

reply

[–] strntz (11469) 2 years ago

Once reality ends, all we have are memories, and mostly incomplete ones at that.

We spend thousands of dollars to go on vacation, but while we have a good time while there, no one would pay money to do this unless we retained a memory of it.

Recall provided the same post-trip memories for far less cost. A week later, the person who actually went to Mars would have the same memories as those who had them implanted, plus Recall could provide "improved" memories as well.

reply

[–] 123Guy (6607) 2 years ago

I like what you are saying here, but I only go on vacations for the fun experience at that time, never for the generated memories. I consider the memories and photos a plant did effect, but would do with out them completely if I had to to experience Tha vacation at the time.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

Agreed.
I actually often get annoyed by pictures and memories. I fucking loathe nostalgia.
I care about the experience in the moment, not its impression.

reply

[–] strntz (11469) 2 years ago

But if we can't take the memory with us, nostalgia or not, it's a waste of money.

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 2 years ago

You just came up w/a GREAT idea for a movie. Just FYI.

reply

[–] strntz (11469) 2 years ago

Write your screenplay. I'll settle for an unpaid movie credit..

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

I see the advantage or convenience of having easy memories over actually gaining them, but like I said in the op, why?

Even our pictures and memories and souvenirs are useless compared with the real experience. They are just a byproduct of the direct experience.
I want to eat the fucking cake, not to look at the empty box in my trash while somebody sprayed cake smell all over my kitchen while I was away.

reply

[–] strntz (11469) 2 years ago

Even our pictures and memories and souvenirs are useless compared with the real experience.

Yes, and it's real while we're there. After we get home, we only have the very imperfect and extraordinarily incomplete memories.

Recall offered the same or better memories for what is assumed to be a fraction of the cost of a real trip.

I've been to Disney World twice in my life. Two weeks total and I have snippets of memory images and maybe 10 minutes worth of complete "video" memory.

If it were safe, I'd do a Recall type vacation to Disney World and not have to put up with the travel inconvenience, the rain every afternoon, and the scorching heat in August (wife a teacher, we only went during summer vacation with our kids).

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

Well, for Disney World I would pay Recall to remove my real memories.

reply

[–] strntz (11469) 2 years ago

LOL

reply

[–] ducksoup (3933) 2 years ago

If I remember correctly Johnny Mnemonic needed one to transport large data files, but I'm relying on a very faulty circuit to retrieve that information.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

404 error. Memory not found.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

My understanding is that they implant the experience. It's not just like, "Oh, I remember when..." It's more like you go through the experience and have the memory of it for life.

It's like downloading a really great vacation, only the exact parameters are set by yourself.

Who is their customer base? Well, aside from the curious who want to see what it's like, it might be somebody who never had the opportunity. Imagine somebody with a severe disability yearning to go skiing just once. Another client might be a wall street trader who sacrificed everything for money, only to realize what a stupid pursuit that was. He signs up for some meaningful memories implanted.

And for some, fantasy might be far more appealing than reality - it depends on their reality. It might be grim enough (or humdrum) for them to just go, "Anything's better than this - even if it is fake" and go for it.

It doesn't appeal to you, but there are lots of persons for whom this would be their dream.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

Isn't any of the above a great gateway to schizophrenia?

I would love to fly or go through a solid wall like a ghost. I have done it many times in my dreams. The moment I think I actually did that, is the moment I need a straight jacket.
Same for any other more normal event I never experienced, I prefer my brain to know I never did it.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

Me, too. I'd rather have the real than the fake and I'd rather not mess around with my brain chemistry too much, either. But some people love that.

Surely you know of some people who get blitzed on drugs and/or alcohol at every chance they get? Or at least you know of them? You know about LSD. That's not for everybody, either.

If there's a market for hallucinogens, there's a market for Rekall.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

I must concur with your conclusion.
I often tend to exclude idiots from my reasoning. Which is a fallacy, even more so if we talk about escapism and brain fucking. Alcohol and drugs are more popular than ever.

The sad reality is, people hate reality.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

I'm not sure you should be writing off everybody who doesn't think like you as an idiot so readily.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

That is not what I meant.
I certainly try to consider different opinions and ideas than mine. But I often, erroneously, ignore the stupid ones.
While in reality lots of people are plain stupid.
Like alcohol or drug users, or tobacco or any other harming product. Where is their intelligence? I consider them idiots, and victims of stupidity. Not because they don't think like me, but because they just are.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

What do you mean by "user" and "harming product"?

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

Products that have almost no benefit and cause very clear and well known damage to you and/or to others.
I should have said harmful, my bad.

Alcohol or drug user=somebody drinking alcohol or doing drugs.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

I'm asking, because a broad definition of "harming product" could include things like sugar or social media. And "user" could mean any use at all.

I agree with the foolishness and futility of these habits more if they become addictions due to negligence or self-indulgence. But somebody who does a little reefer now and then or somebody who likes to eat the occasional candy bar isn't an idiot, to me.

Then again, just because somebody is a heavy user of heavy drugs doesn't necessarily make me think they're idiots. Some of them are desperate. They're trapped. They don't feel like there's anything else. It's almost like nihilistic overload and they can't handle it. Having a few moments of weakness that take somebody out of control doesn't make them idiots, per se.

So, that's why I'm asking about clarification on definitions: depending on how wide a net you're casting, I might mildly object or really disagree.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

Of course. No need to be extremist.
Anything can be a poison. A lamp can be used to kill. Still, there is a difference between a lamp and a gun, or an atomic bomb.
But the opposite is also true.
One candy will not kill you. But then again, there is a lucky guy that survived Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. Pretty sure they are both undeniably bad for you, even if results may vary.
What is key is the amount you take, and users are often addicts.

Having said that, smoking one cigarette, which will likely not harm you, is also difficult to pass as a sign of intelligence.

I also wrote that they are victims of stupidity. Not necessarily their own, it could be somebody else's evil that turned them into users.
I know it may not always be easy to stop using harmful products, but it is a sign of intelligence.

Going back to TR, I would consider stupid to fool my brain into a permanent delusion just to have some fun (or worse, to remember I had some fun).

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

Thank you for clarifying; that's a lot more transparent now.

I wouldn't say smoking is intelligent, but I also wouldn't say smoking is a sign of stupidity. I don't think there's a correlation there. I guess it's because I think most people have one vice or another. Smoking, sugar, or sex - we all indulge ourselves. Some of those indulgences are healthy. If they become an addiction, they aren't.

But addiction or giving in to temptation aren't necessarily intellectual or anti-intellectual. I see willpower as a different facet of personality.

I would think messing with the brain as much as Rekall does to be imprudent at best, and yeah, I'd probably think that people should go for real experiences.

But then, one of the most interesting, ongoing philosophical questions in sci-fi (TR, certainly) is, "What is 'real', anyway?"

Reploids, holodecks, memory implants, androids, and virtual reality. If you have an experience, does it matter where the stimuli came from?

Here's an interesting spin on it: there are songs that affect me deeply and give me an emotional reaction. I'm sure there are some for you, as well. Is the emotional reaction to the song weaker for being generated by poetry and music than if you really experienced it?

reply

[–] Macgruber (165) 2 years ago

Maybe this is already talked about but If they can implant memories couldn’t they implant like a 4 year degree or something like that that you could use? Other than just a memory of something for fun and excitement?

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9466) 2 years ago

That could be an amazing movie. I love that idea.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

That would be the greatest use for such technology.
But knowing people, there is little hope it would be popular.

reply

[–] peter_t_2k3 (1036) 2 years ago

While the idea of getting an implant to think you'd do something is a bit of a weird one, I could see people getting implants for the opposite reason, to forget something.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

That makes more sense.
Some intrusive memory would be better deleted.

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1483) 2 years ago

It's not really any different from having an adventure on the holodeck of the starship Enterprise.

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

It is.
Like I explained in other replies, in vr like the holodeck you always know what happened in the real world and what is only strictly virtual.
In this movie instead the implanted memories are as real as the real ones.
As in, you remember of really having taken that trip to Mars.
They even give you fake souvenirs from your fake trip, that you will erroneously remember of really buying there yourself, to fool yourself more convincingly.
See the difference?

reply

[–] Karl Aksel (1483) 2 years ago

But you weren't implanted memories as such - you were given an adventure that you lived through - in your mind only, of course - and you would remember it afterwards. There were no actual insertion of memories as such. Case in point: Dr. Edgemar confronts Quaid and says he is still in the simulation. Why would this be believable at all if the implanted memories were invariably past memories?

reply

[–] Heisenberg (6532) 2 years ago

Mmmhhh, ok that is interesting.
I always considered them memorie implants, but I guess you are right, they are more memories of a fantasy adventure in your head.
Anyway, the difference between recall and dreams or holodeck is that this fantasy adventure that you live though in your head at recall, is NEVER seen as such by the subject.
The recaller wakes up and files such fantasy adventure as a memory from his past that he actually lived through. He remembers it as something from his own real past in the real world, not as a dream or as a fantasy or as a vr simulation.

reply