'I got 320 Gigs up there' - Johnny Mnemonic (1995) Discussion

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

actually i got more data in my memory... ;-)

reply

you've got more in your memory? more than 320gb? i dont believe you, write it all down and post it up :)

I think 320 still sounds quite impressive even though the films a few years old now. if it had been 2gb, that you can now get on a micro sd card, smaller than a postage stamp, then it might sound silly to kill yourself messing with your memory.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] shadrack 16 years ago

According to Raymond Kurzweil in _The_Singularity_Is_Near, p. 126., the capacity of a human being's functional memory is about 1.25 Terabytes. Now obviously a hard drive works nothing like the human brain, but if you're just drawing with the broadest of brush strokes, then one could argue that human beings do, in a way, have memory capacities larger than 320GB.

reply

[–] Megatronika 16 years ago

The mind never forgets, it just suppreses information that it does not find relvent or neccesary. Our inhibition prevents us from taking in everything in our environment.

reply

[–] herrkilman 16 years ago

as I understand it our memories are electrical impulses that gets weaker and weaker if we don't use them. even though a memory can lie dormant for VERY many years and still be able to resurface given the right trigger. the mind DO forget stuff, though, in the sense that it mixes things up, recreates, changes details and messes things up in lots of ways. that green house I remember from my childhood might in reality be blue, to take a very obvious example.

reply

[–] iffy619 12 years ago

There are people who can remember everything and say that it is a horrible thing to have.

"Whoo-ah"

reply

[–] koffeenkreame41-1 12 years ago

^^Check your PM, Iffy!

"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit me!"- Hudson in Aliens.

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 11 years ago

actually, the mind does see EVERYTHING we hear and see in our enviroment, it just ignores most of it as "unimportant background noise". however if we were to ever stimulate the ability to selectively remember things we could dig it out.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] advisepc 17 years ago

Imagine trying to remember more than 550 of 90 minute DivX movies. Everything, every frame, every sound (left and right channels)!

Coming to think to about it, I don't think thats really too hard, isn't it?

reply

[–] aburn-1 16 years ago

it's like remembering any song you've ever heard by listening to a few seconds of it. it's remembering any show or movie you've ever seen in your life by seeing just a few seconds of a scene. that's a lot of stuff your brain remembers.

reply

[–] esteban2 16 years ago

Yes. I sat up when he said 320Gb - it probably sounded a lot back then, but really it is nothing nowadays.
Gibson should have known about that law (I forget the name) that says that the maximum computer memory increases 10fold every 18 months.

Somebody's coming up .... somebody serious

reply

[–] jvanderide 16 years ago

I saw this when it was a new movie and i remembered them using Megabytes, not gigs. Is my memory flawed, or did greedo shoot first again?

reply

[–] microbit 16 years ago

Darn straight. You make a good point.
Gee, there are some people on here that talk BS...
Our brain is a neural network, there are millions of tasks a child can effortlessly perform that super computers never could do.
320 GB might seem a lot, but any computing system (regardless of its memory !)
has zero capability of dealing with tasks that are trivial to the human brain :
ambiguity.
There are many neural network machine algorithms around that already can do some impressive tasks (eg. hetero associative memory with back propagation), but these NN systems require massive amounts of training before they even remotely yield some success rates.

Computing systems have the advantage that they can randomly recall information (instructions and data) extremely fast, but their amount of memory has no bearing whatsoever on the capabilities to be comparable to a human brain.

Also, a human brain can truly multi task many things. Computing systems can't !
Multi tasking appears so because the tasks are switched fast enough to appear as though they were simultaneous. Multi processor or super scalar systems still don't truly multi task because the outcome of one operation still stalls other cores because they have to wait for those outcomes.
There's no point to be able to simultaneously add 3 and 4 and also multiply that sum by 5 in the same clock cycle - the first clock will add 3 and 4, the 2nd core will stall, waiting for the result of the addition, and then multiply it by 5 in the 2nd clock phase.

If you were to equate the 'memory' of an operating adult brain, even stacks of Tera Bytes wouldn't come close.....

reply

[–] fresh_ 16 years ago

I love that a film this *beep* is sparking debate. Come to think of it, I love the internet.

reply

[–] bouncylj 16 years ago

i may be wrong in thinking but as you remember he is a person and he already has other things taking up his memory capacity so hes filling it up with maybe more than its supposed to take, just a theroy

"..oh and when we get to the party, we'll try and save you some treats" - duo maxwell

reply

[–] jimmygijoe 16 years ago

Don't you know? When using a mnemonic implant, 330 gigs is a head full.

reply

[–] Naughty-God 14 years ago

LOL, I remember my Tech nerd neighbor in 1995 saying that computers could never reach past 2 GHz of processing or store more than 500 GB of memory unless it was tied into a server.

(¯`i´¯)´·¸.)‹^›

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Bishop_of_Battle 14 years ago

Reminds me of that scene in Hackers where the kids are drooling over Jolie's laptop:

"Yo. Check this out guys, this is insanely great, it's got a 28.8 BPS modem!"
"Active matrix, man. A million psychedelic colors. Man, baby, sweet, ooo!"
"It has a killer refresh rate!"

reply