[HN Gopher] Deep Aphantasia: a visual brain with minimal influen...
___________________________________________________________________
Deep Aphantasia: a visual brain with minimal influence from priors?
Author : negativelambda
Score : 50 points
Date : 2024-04-06 12:26 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.frontiersin.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.frontiersin.org)
| markx2 wrote:
| Some months, maybe a couple of years ago I realised that I have
| no "mind's eye". For example I know I have grandchildren but I
| cannot visualise them. I cannot visualise a neighbour, or food,
| or a location. That this happens is odd but I can live with it.
|
| More recently I was thinking about gaming, and more specifically
| Prison Architect, Dwarf Fortress, Factorio, City Skylines (all of
| which I own but get nowhere with) and other games where you play,
| you fail, you plan, you repeat. Even Minecraft.
|
| Someone else - I presume - plays, fails, learns, repeats and so
| gain a step toward mastery of the game. (I accept from reading
| that mastery of DF isn't happening soon). I presume that players
| visualise mistakes and visualise workrounds. I cannot do that, I
| do not know how.
|
| I have thousands of hours in gaming but I cannot recall them
| visually, so I respond in-game to what is happening in-game. That
| may not make sense. There will be some learning but in a non-
| visual way.
|
| Is this aphantasia? I have no idea and I'm not about to be
| diagnosed.
|
| I do have vivid and lucid dreaming but ask me to close my eyes
| and visualise an apple and nope, doesn't happen.
| zimpenfish wrote:
| > ask me to close my eyes and visualise an apple and nope,
| doesn't happen.
|
| That's definitely aphantasia as I understand (and suffer from)
| it.
|
| I've never really considered the "visual learning from failure"
| aspect of it. I know that in, e.g., Minecraft, I have
| tremendous trouble with building things because I can't
| visualise them beforehand and thus things get hodgepodged into
| these hideous homunculi of buildings or redstone contraptions.
| thinkingemote wrote:
| One way that scientists test is to use modality agnostic
| language. For example something like "imagine going to a store
| to shop for a new sofa. You find one and imagine where it would
| go in your room."
|
| Then you change or introduce things "make the sofa 50% smaller"
| then a bit more "change the colour of it to deep yellow" etc
|
| Or imagine getting on a bus and their is only one seat left.
| dynisor wrote:
| I am definitely not a doctor. However, I have a friend
| diagnosed with aphantasia and this is almost exactly how she
| described it to me.
| lairv wrote:
| Not exactly the same but recently I realised that I can
| visualize the face of most of the people I know, my parents, my
| family, my friends, however I'm unable to visualize my own face
| Buttons840 wrote:
| Can you draw things without a reference? What happens if you
| try to play pictionary?
| markx2 wrote:
| If I cannot see - with my eyes there and then - a scribble
| happens.
|
| To sort of expand: I'm old enough that a diagnosis makes zero
| difference. But it does explain so much.
|
| When misophonia became a thing it explained so much of my
| reactions to certain noises, that I was not alone.
|
| Just knowing that others are experiencing the same removes
| some of that aloneness.
| khazhoux wrote:
| I'm aphantasic but I've drawn my whole life. In Pictionary I
| show off and draw _exactly_ the thing being described,
| meanwhile others struggle with their stick figures. It 's
| hilarious.
|
| So on the one hand I can draw an excellent random generic man
| or a generic face. If you pose for me I'll do an uncanny
| portrait. But I can't draw my wife of 30 years -- I can't
| even see her in my mind. I can't draw an actor I've seen 200
| times unless I were to sit with photographs and ingrain their
| face by deliberate practice
| AQuantized wrote:
| Using Prison Architect as an example, when playing can you
| 'remember' the dimensions of the different rooms you've built?
| Or would you have to zoom out to plan an extension of your
| prison? It definitely sounds like aphantasia.
| orta wrote:
| Cool! I think I'd be classed as deep Aphant like Loren (one of
| the paper's authors) but I also have an internal monologue.
| japoco wrote:
| I was pretty intrigued by Aphantasia a while ago, as I can't
| picture anything at all with my eyes closed. Then I asked all my
| friends and none of them could either, apparently. So I'm
| wondering what "picturing" means in the definition of aphantasia?
| With my eyes closed all I see is pitch black, but I can "imagine"
| myself seeing a red apple even with my eyes open, I don't
| actually see anything though.
| t-3 wrote:
| Actually seeing with your eyes would (I think) be a form of
| synesthesia. Being able to imagine a red apple is "normal". Not
| being able to imagine a red apple is aphantasia ("imagine" in
| the sense of a "visual" imagination, not in the sense of being
| able to conjecture the existence of an apple with particular
| qualities).
| dataflow wrote:
| Does it follow that people with aphantasia (edit:
| "aphantasics", per the article) would be unable to draw a
| realistic-looking apple from scratch? If not, then how do
| scientists show someone has aphantasia? Is it falsifiable?
| t-3 wrote:
| Not at all - you can still see the paper and know what an
| apple is supposed to look like. Describing a face or
| drawing a scene from memory is very hard though.
| dataflow wrote:
| That doesn't really make sense to me. What does it mean
| to "know what an apple looks like" without being unable
| to imagine it? How would that be any different from
| knowing what a face looks like without being able to
| imagine it? Do note I said _realistic_ apple [1], not
| just a cartoonish drawing, so I don 't just mean "a
| squished circle"...
|
| [1] Example: https://drawpj.com/wp-
| content/uploads/2018/05/hyperrealistic...
| t-3 wrote:
| Why would I have to visualize to know whether or not
| something is an apple? I can recognize one on sight
| without having to match it up with a visualization in my
| head, so I can start from the right shape and add details
| until it becomes an apple. No visualization required at
| all. Obviously it's quicker and easier to use a model or
| reference picture, but not required.
| dataflow wrote:
| I guess I don't see how that's be different from drawing
| a face? Start with the right shape an add details until
| it becomes a face?
| t-3 wrote:
| I can draw a generic face, but not a specific one unless
| I have a model or picture. If I had to give a description
| of someone, even family members or close friends, I would
| be hopeless other than very basic things like relative
| height, hair and skin color.
| dataflow wrote:
| That's so fascinating, thanks. Does aphantasia give you
| any trouble in your daily life? Or does it end up being a
| non-issue?
| t-3 wrote:
| It's a non-issue. I never even realized that it was a
| thing until I several years ago I was listening to a
| podcast that involved discussing mental monologues and
| imagery and thinking "WTF are these people talking
| about?!", and then doing some research. I had previously
| always understood things like "mind's eye" and inner
| voice/conscience as metaphors or some kind of mystical
| superstition.
| warp wrote:
| Prof Joel Pearson has developed three distinct objective
| tests to measure aphantasia. Here is a talk about it:
| https://youtu.be/tA_4HNaKsS0
| dataflow wrote:
| Interesting, thanks. I'll have to watch it when I find
| the chance.
| Filligree wrote:
| In addition to the other replies: No, aphantastics (nice
| word!) aren't _unable_ to do it, much like almost anyone
| can become amateur-level competent at almost anything if
| they put in enough effort.
|
| But it's a matter of talent, and you're missing a big
| component. That can be made up for in other ways, though I
| think it'd be hard to reach the peak.
| Climato wrote:
| I don't think you have it if you can imagine something.
|
| I don't think it's meant to be in that dark space / visual eye
| space.
| klipt wrote:
| Consider another sense, like hearing. Many people experience
| "earworms" where a song gets stuck in their head and plays
| repeatedly. They know it's not actually playing since there's
| no "external" sound but they can hear it "internally".
|
| "Picturing" something in your head is the same, just with the
| sense of vision instead of the sense of hearing.
| awinter-py wrote:
| ask this questionnaire to a range of people, including some
| visual artists / designers:
|
| close your eyes, think of a family member, who is it, where are
| they, what are they wearing, can you see details about the
| clothing, can you see details in the background, is there
| motion, if you open your eyes can you still see it
|
| there will be some very strong yeses in there if you sample
| people in visual professions
| mdswanson wrote:
| Even designers who can visualize report different
| representations and experiences:
| https://aphantasia.com/article/strategies/visualizing-the-
| in...
| mbivert wrote:
| It's definitely not a black and white thing but a (flexible)
| scale: a noticeable variation of intensity can be felt when
| practicing an activity demanding an intense visual focus on a
| specific object (e.g. painting): an stronger-than-usual visual
| image can be recalled effortlessly, at least during a few days.
| mdswanson wrote:
| The problem is asking people to close their eyes. Most
| visualizers don't need to close their eyes to visualize, and
| many state that they can visualize even better with them open.
| Everyone sees some form of black/Eigengrau when they close
| their eyes.
| AQuantized wrote:
| I don't think it has anything to do with your eyes being
| open/closed, or even to do with your eyes at all, unless it's
| describing something different to what I assume. It's about
| _mental_ images and visualization, not your field of vision
| itself.
| asveikau wrote:
| I slowly realized I have aphantasia by reading an HN comment
| about it last December. That day I started asking my daughter
| questions about visualizing things and daydreams and she ended up
| giving me a perfect description of aphantasia with minimal
| prompting. It's very interesting to have gone through life not
| realizing I have this difference. A few people I asked the same
| questions of who do not seem to have aphantasia thought the topic
| was a little crazy, as if it's weird to perceive this way.
|
| I tend to process a lot of things through sound, and go around
| the world recognizing people by voice or unwillingly trying to
| place people's accents when they talk. I think it might be
| related somehow.
| mbivert wrote:
| I remember reading once somewhere on the Internet someone
| baffled to learn that people weren't in control when dreaming.
| It's amusing how inner-experiences can unknowingly be so wildly
| different from person to person.
| smokel wrote:
| Why does aphantasia come up so often on Hacker News?
|
| I find it mildly annoying that there is nearly no scientific
| backing to it, and that we are having the same discussions over
| and over again.
|
| It seems very similar to the RSI craze, back in the 1990s, when
| almost everyone who went near a computer couldn't work for months
| because they thought they had it. And then somehow the condition
| vanished.
|
| Yes, some people actually have RSI, and some people probably have
| severe aphantasia and actually suffer from it. But I'm afraid
| there is a large group of people who think they are missing out
| on brain candy that simply doesn't exist, (edit: or which they
| may have not successfully developed access to yet.)
| smrq wrote:
| I have a conjecture that aphantasia may be overrepresented in
| software disciplines. It seems sensible to me that a field
| which is almost wholly abstract would select a higher
| proportion of aphantasic people than average, as it would be of
| no hindrance. (I would expect the same from mathematics and
| maybe some sciences, but I'm not a member of any such community
| so I wouldn't know firsthand.)
|
| Again, just a conjecture, but it would help to explain why we
| seem to come out of the woodwork in such circles so regularly.
| mdswanson wrote:
| There's research that people with aphantasia are over-
| represented in STEM fields:
| https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/people-with-aphantasia-
| are...
| smokel wrote:
| Thanks for sharing that link.
|
| It's risky business to infer anything from job preferences
| though. Consider that (as far as I know) an extraordinarily
| large proportion of professional programmers are _male_ --
| obviously a cultural phenomenon. We certainly cannot infer
| that a talent for programming is located on the
| y-chromosome.
|
| Edit after reading the paper associated with that link:
|
| _> Our aphantasic and hyperphantasic samples were
| opportunistic, in the sense that our participants had
| approached us spontaneously following publicity triggered
| by our original publication_
|
| This suggests that many of the participants actually read
| scientific publications (or reporting thereof). That's an
| obviously biased set of people who indeed are way more
| likely to work in STEM (and have an abundance of time to
| spend browsing the web), rather than as hairdressers.
| ItsMonkk wrote:
| It's interesting because it should be very easy to put a test
| in action. Are there true capability differences between people
| who think in different ways? Feynman[0] goes through a
| particular version of such a test in his Ways of Thinking
| series.
|
| It should be trivial to write up a puzzle game such that, much
| like those color blind tests where you need to find numbers,
| will very quickly eliminate people who think in different ways
| while being a piece of cake for others. And yet I don't think
| I've ever encountered one.
|
| Are there no capabilities that can not be overcome? Would that
| puzzle game just be terrible entertainment? Why doesn't it
| exist?
|
| [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbwLkuxORdY
| mdswanson wrote:
| A good introduction to aphantasia (I'm a total, multi-sensory
| aphant): https://aphantasia.com/guide/
| kneel wrote:
| The mass recoginition of Aphantasia and the rise of screentime
| seems somewhat correlated. They might be reinforcing one another,
| multiple avenues of cognition could be warping in unprecedented
| ways.
|
| Highly industrialized societies have large populations that can
| experience, interact and survive their entire lives almost solely
| through screens. This seems to be an unknowing experiment we're
| performing on brains.
| pavlov wrote:
| Isn't this essentially the same concern that Socrates had about
| writing according to Plato:
|
| "... for this discovery of [letters, writing] will create
| forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use
| their memories; they will trust to the external written
| characters and not remember of themselves."
| light_hue_1 wrote:
| Nope. Not even remotely.
|
| Now that we know what we're looking for we've found evidence
| from the 1800s for aphantasia. And at rates that look
| consistent with modern rates. Galton famously asked about this
| but almost no one follows up on it seriously.
| ben_w wrote:
| Screen time correlates with:
|
| * Average milk produced per cow in the US:
| https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/6254_global-...
|
| * Visitors to Universal Orlando's Islands of Adventure:
| https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/10880_global...
|
| * Popularity of the first name Graham:
| https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/13927_popula...
|
| Even if there was an actual correlation with aphantasia and not
| just a case of "we weren't looking before", there's a lot of
| non-causal correlations in this world.
| xpl wrote:
| There is a sort of confusion when people read about aphantasia,
| they tend to imagine (pun intended) that most people have vivid
| pictures when they close their eyes, coming to conclusion that
| they must have aphantasia, because it isn't what happens with
| them.
|
| But normally, you won't _actually see_ anything with your eyes
| closed, otherwise it would be a "closed-eye visual" (CEV) which
| is you only experience when you do hallucinogenic drugs (shrooms,
| LSD)!
|
| Nonetheless, most people can "visualize" when they imagine
| objects, people's faces, places from memory -- but it is totally
| not like AR (i.e. actually overlaying images on top of light
| perception). Nope, it feels more like you see it with some
| mysterious "mind's eye", disconnected from real eyes. It is very
| faint and tacit, like you're perceiving a very abstract high-
| level representation of an object, instead of seeing actual
| "pixels". And it doesn't require having eyes closed, people often
| can do it as easily with their eyes open, as it doesn't interfere
| with the normal vision at all.
| temp0826 wrote:
| IME with ayahuasca (but probably other psychedelics too), there
| are different types of visions you might have. I've clearly
| experienced the typical CEVs but also have stark images coming
| through my mind's eye (much more akin to normal life
| visualizing). My tolerance is pretty high, it takes me an
| absurd amount to have the full-on technicolor visions, but I do
| seem to get a lot of color through my mind's eye still (usually
| related to the master plant diets and their spirits). There is
| another type of vision I've experienced that is somewhere in
| between that I have a lot of trouble describing, it pops out in
| a different way on top of normal vision.
| ergonaught wrote:
| Most of my family actually see things. One or two of them would
| qualify as hyperphantasiac, presumably.
|
| I see absolutely nothing. When you say "it" is "faint and
| tacit", you are describing an "it" that simply does not exist
| for me. I see a whole lot of people who don't have aphantasia
| get hung up on this. They keep describing an "it" without
| accepting that for some of us there is no "it".
|
| The way I've usually "tested" it among friends/family/clients
| is to just ask them to imagine that there is a ball, on a
| table, and someone pushes the ball so that it rolls off the
| table onto the floor.
|
| I then ask them to answer, from memory, simple things like what
| color was the ball, what kind of table was it, what material
| was the floor, was there a sound when the ball fell to the
| floor, what else happened, etc.
|
| No one I've known with aphantasia (including myself) has
| answers for any such questions when asked to recall what they
| just imagined, but almost all can answer such questions "while
| imagining".
| xpl wrote:
| It is an interesting test (I tried it once I read your
| sentence). Turns out I can imagine a ball rolling off a table
| without detailing the imaginary scene to have a specific
| material, texture or sound (and if I wasn't specifically
| asked, I won't likely picture it).
|
| My imaginary scene clearly had some "spatial sense" though --
| I saw (but more like "felt") the flat surface of the table,
| the edges of it, how it is positioned relative to myself, the
| roundness of the ball rolling, and how it falls off.
| khazhoux wrote:
| > The way I've usually "tested" it among
| friends/family/clients is to just ask them to imagine that
| there is a ball, on a table, and someone pushes the ball so
| that it rolls off the table onto the floor.
|
| Note that it's possible to visualize _motion_ of an object
| without visualizing the object itself. This is me. I can 't
| hold any imagery in my head, but I can easily imagine the
| _movement_ of a kickflip or a pirouette, or I can see the
| _bouncing_ of three balls without seeing the balls
| themselves.
| y1n0 wrote:
| > I can see the bouncing of three balls without seeing the
| balls themselves.
|
| I know that we can't get inside each other's heads to truly
| understand their perception (yet), so I feel like these
| conversations can't possibly go anywhere, but I feel
| compelled to say that, to me, what you are saying makes no
| sense whatsoever.
|
| I'm not denying your experience. I'm just saying I can't
| begin to comprehend it.
| LouisSayers wrote:
| I resonate with their description of it, the way I'd
| describe it is something like:
|
| Close your eyes and imagine the month March (just the
| idea of the month). Walk forward 2 months.
|
| That's what a ball rolling off a table is like for some
| of us.
| khazhoux wrote:
| Yup!
|
| I can describe it as: I see the motion vectors but not
| the objects. Imagine a dancer in a fog, you don't see the
| dancer but see their imprint as they move...
| a_cardboard_box wrote:
| I can visualize the ball without color, so while having
| aphantasia implies no color, the converse is not true. It's
| sort of like an autostereogram, but with only the depth
| effect and no color at all.
| joquarky wrote:
| That is an excellent way to describe the qualia of abstract
| visual perception.
|
| I wonder if people with aphantasia have trouble with them.
| ben_w wrote:
| FWIW, @a_cardboard_box's description doesn't sound like
| anything I personally experience.
|
| Not that we should expect immediate agreement on any of
| these things: words can only gain meaning by shared
| experience, and it's _really hard_ to share the
| experiences that are confined to the inside our own
| skulls.
| t-3 wrote:
| Aphantasia doesn't lack color, it lacks a place to put the
| color and therefore color has no relevance other than
| descriptive. The ball is just an imaginary object, like an
| uninitialized variable. I can imagine that one exists, I
| can imagine that it would have traits like red or blue, big
| or small, bouncy or not, but I don't visualize it, and
| those fields need to be filled in one-by-one, they aren't
| defaulted when I imagine a ball, and nothing changes other
| than the description if I change them. A ball rolling off a
| table is more like the lead into a physics question to me
| than an exercise in imagination.
| ben_w wrote:
| > I can visualize the ball without color
|
| Right now I can only visualise with a colour... unless
| "transparent" counts as "without". But even then, there's a
| full-colour environment for the transparency to be
| meaningful, and it can't be total transparency because then
| it isn't present. Even if I imagine a wireframe grid to
| show where it is, the grid has a colour.
| saberience wrote:
| I actually experience CEVs easily without any drugs at all,
| something that's happened all my life. I can even influence it
| to some extent. IE if I close my eyes and focus I can create
| more and more intense closed eye visuals without falling
| asleep. When I was a child I used to do this for fun when I was
| bored.
|
| So yeah, it's definitely not a hard and fast rule about CEVs.
| gryn wrote:
| I used to when I was younger, these day I seems to have lost
| that ability even my dreams are not vivid and I rarely have a
| dream (that I remember)
| ben_w wrote:
| I've had the audio equivalent of that at least once, and _I
| think_ (can 't prove it) a few other times. But it was scary
| so I never tried again.
|
| I suspect I had the visual once, thanks to one time as a
| teenager I tried a magic spell and the explanation of "I'm
| capable of self-hypnosis" is much more plausible than the
| spell having had even the slightest effect.
|
| I can easily create intense overrides for sensory experience
| whenever I like for my sense of which way down is, and mild
| overrides for the various kinds of touch.
| JoeyJoJoJr wrote:
| This might seem like a weird question, but have you ever
| had distortions in your sense of the size of features of
| your face? I remember a very strange feeling as a child
| about my sense of scale when I was dreaming or asleep.
| Feeling like I was minuscule while in the presence of
| something very big. Later in adult life I found I distort
| my sensory perception of my facial features, ie make my
| lips or cheeks feel gigantic, by pressing a very particular
| part of my face into the pillow at the correct angle. This
| sensation seemed to feel similar to one I experienced as a
| child.
|
| I also have or have had the ability to do other sensory
| overrides like distorting my sense of physical space, ie
| warp the bounds of my room while I stare at ceiling in bed.
| It's not really a visual thing, but it makes me think of
| the spoon bending scene in the matrix.
| ben_w wrote:
| Not my face specifically, but as a teenager my whole body
| sometimes suddenly had a different sense of size.
|
| For my body as a whole, I also don't have an inner sense
| of a permanent body morphology that is "mine", so with
| one exception[0] I can't even imagine what it's like to
| be body-dysmorphic -- even if we lived in a world of
| magic gender/species transformations that might happen
| with no ill effect, if I woke up and found that had
| happened, the only concern is if society can cope with
| it, not one of my own inner psyche.
|
| The one exception is forked tongue. That is a _sticky_
| morphology to imagine, and one I don 't like at all. It's
| also something a friend got done surgically. Good for
| them, they seem to be enjoying it, it makes me go "aaaa".
|
| [0] I assume there are limits beyond my imagination, but
| my imagination does at least include tails, wings, gender
| flipping, and I've listened to the We Are Legion (We Are
| Bob) series.
| kalaksi wrote:
| Wait... You mean images of concrete things or just shapes or
| something? I can do what you describe (always have and can
| influence it) but it's just moving shapes with colors. Kind
| of similar to those you get when you watch bright lights and
| then go to a dark room. Isn't that common?
| grugagag wrote:
| People who have aphantasia know right away something must be
| off for them when others enjoy things they don't, such overly
| descriptive prose and so on. It is indeed very difficult to
| compare one's internal experience with others' and that's one
| reason aphantasia flies under the radar.
| user8501 wrote:
| I personally believe that people just answer the question "do
| you visualize?" differently. I used to think I had "aphantasia"
| but like you said, you see it without seeing it. If your eyes
| and brain are functioning at all, your brain is perfectly
| capable of creating colorful images. Just look around. Those
| colors you see? That's your brain.
| carver wrote:
| It seems that Aphantasia does not globally bin into two groups,
| since I don't fit in either.
|
| By my rough count of Figure 2 tests, where Derek is at 0 to Loren
| at 6 (ignoring F), I have about 3.5 atypical responses.
|
| My experience with Figure 2:
|
| A) I can flip between cone and weird triangle, saw the cone first
|
| B) I see it as if someone placed identical cat stickers on the
| drawing. I can intellectually understand the perspective, how the
| upper-right one is supposed to be bigger, but don't experience it
| that way.
|
| C) I see that there is an implicit rectangle (to me it looks
| slightly wider than tall). But the color doesn't "spread" to the
| middle, it's just like 2A -- a boundary in the surrounding shapes
| implicitly extends into the empty space to form a rectangle
| shape.
|
| D) It takes minimal, but non-zero effort to see the vase
|
| E) It's trivial to flip between the two orientations of the cube
|
| F) skipped
|
| G) I don't understand what I'm looking for here. I see clouds,
| sky, and a silhouette with a tree. Is there a face in it
| somewhere? I can see the smiley face on
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _It seems that Aphantasia does not globally bin into two
| groups, since I don 't fit in either._
|
| I believe you're correct, since I commonly see it presented as
| a spectrum. https://aphantasia.com/study/vviq/
| stoniejohnson wrote:
| For G) I'm seeing something akin to the Moon falling in The
| Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask.
|
| Basically a face staring at the tree from above.
| carver wrote:
| Fascinating. Thanks for the clue. It's the most complete
| blank for me of all the tests. I looked up the reference
| image, but still cannot see it in figure 2G. I can't even
| guess at where the eyes/nose/mouth are in the clouds.
| stoniejohnson wrote:
| The two dark splotches above the tree are the eyes. The
| nose is to the right of the lower splotch, below the higher
| splotch. The forehead to the left.
| carver wrote:
| Ahah! I see it now, thanks.
| lukeinator42 wrote:
| yeah, I think some of their example stimuli aren't the greatest
| in that figure. There are definitely some better perspective
| illusions online. I'm not sure if I really see the Neon
| Spreading Illusion in C either; maybe it's spreading a bit,
| haha.
| christophilus wrote:
| For whatever it's worth, I have Aphantasia, and share your
| experiences exactly.
| scotty79 wrote:
| When I saw the title I thought it's about current state of AI.
| That's what currently AI is missing. Imagination.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-04-06 23:00 UTC)