Here are the sources. I do not post AI answers, just a translation from my content-addressed brain to label-addressed academic nomenclature. Consider my use of LLMs a prosthetic or translator because that’s what it functionally is in this scenario.
Key Academic References for Further Reading
If you would like to explore the foundational research behind these ideas, the following papers and books provide the technical context and nuance:
1. On the “Overfitted” Brain and Cognitive Rigidity
Hoel, E. (2021). “The overfitted brain: Dreams evolved to assist generalization.” Patterns, 2(5). [1]
Note: This is the primary source for the “overfitting” framework as applied to biological brains. It argues that limited, repetitive environmental input (like early-life conditioning) leads to a loss of generalizability.
2. On Ideological Rigidity and Cognitive Flexibility
Zmigrod, L. (2020). “A Psychology of Ideology: Unpacking the Psychological Structure of Ideological Thinking.” Perspectives on Psychological Science. [2]
Note: This work moves away from the content of beliefs and toward the psychological structure of ideological thinking, providing the empirical basis for why rigidity manifests consistently across political, religious, and dogmatic spectrums.
3. On Memory Reconsolidation and Identity Protection
Nader, K., & Hardt, O. (2009). “The effects of consolidation and reconsolidation on memory.” Trends in Neurosciences.
Note: This is a foundational paper on how established memories (like core values/identity) are not static but can be rendered labile (malleable) and then updated—or “torn down and rebuilt”—during the reconsolidation window.
Kahan, D. M. (2013). “Ideology, Motivated Reasoning, and Cognitive Reflection.” Judgment and Decision Making.
Note: This research details how “identity-protective cognition” causes the brain to filter or dismiss conflicting evidence, acting as a defense mechanism for core beliefs.
Providing these sources allows for a much more grounded discussion than a general synthesis. The core of the argument—that cognitive rigidity functions similarly to an overfitted computational model and requires significant “re-training” to alter—is a testable and discussed hypothesis in current neuroscientific and psychological literature.
What kind of prosthetic would you even need to compile a list of sources? And why there are only 2 references listed as 100% total? Not to mention the wording of the “human” part (“content-addressed”, “label-addressed” etc.)
This is either an AI bot or a person who lost any ability to proofread, even. Either way, this is 100% AI answer that didn’t cross a human head.
I would suggest instance admins to ban this account.
A neurodivergent with RSI that doesn’t give a shit about your opinion of how they should live their life, nor care about justifying themselves to you since we’ve reached this point.
AI answer is not and should not be taken as a proof.
Even when it’s right on the base thing (more rigid neuron connections), the rest is filled with mounts of nuances it fails to describe.
If you want to use AI for that, I’d suggest asking it for original sources and reading from there, at least.
I am not handing you AI answers, I’m having AI translate from what I know/intuit to what’s widely known
Here are the sources. I do not post AI answers, just a translation from my content-addressed brain to label-addressed academic nomenclature. Consider my use of LLMs a prosthetic or translator because that’s what it functionally is in this scenario.
Key Academic References for Further Reading
If you would like to explore the foundational research behind these ideas, the following papers and books provide the technical context and nuance:
1. On the “Overfitted” Brain and Cognitive Rigidity
2. On Ideological Rigidity and Cognitive Flexibility
3. On Memory Reconsolidation and Identity Protection
Providing these sources allows for a much more grounded discussion than a general synthesis. The core of the argument—that cognitive rigidity functions similarly to an overfitted computational model and requires significant “re-training” to alter—is a testable and discussed hypothesis in current neuroscientific and psychological literature.
References
The overfitted brain: Dreams evolved to assist generalization (40%) ↩︎
A Psychology of Ideology: Unpacking the Psychological Structure of… (60%) ↩︎
Your point would come across better without your “prosthetic”.
We’re humans, just write your thoughts and have faith in the reader
All you’ve done is obfuscate your point and encourage people to not bother reading
Do you even know what RSI means? I am personally experiencing pain as I type these characters.
I do know what it means. A lot of people who type for a living experience it to some degree at some point.
I’m really sorry it inhibits you this much. That must suck immensely
Repetitive strain injury. And yeah. It sucks being unable to type as a software dev
Obviously preaching to the choir here:
As one dev with prior RSI to another, have you tried an ergo keyboard? I find moving to a rented split was the only thing that helped me.
No I haven’t, and I’m not sure where to get one or if that’s even possible where I live tbh
What kind of prosthetic would you even need to compile a list of sources? And why there are only 2 references listed as 100% total? Not to mention the wording of the “human” part (“content-addressed”, “label-addressed” etc.)
This is either an AI bot or a person who lost any ability to proofread, even. Either way, this is 100% AI answer that didn’t cross a human head.
I would suggest instance admins to ban this account.
How about a neurodivergent mind as the baseline? Did you consider the possibility?
So, RSI or neurodivergence? Or both + total inability to use voice input and formulate basic data lists while working as a programmer?
A neurodivergent with RSI that doesn’t give a shit about your opinion of how they should live their life, nor care about justifying themselves to you since we’ve reached this point.