You're probably right that that approach would work, but would it be the most efficient way to practice? I think the problem is that Mnemosyne would not see the connections between the 500 different cards. Even if each card takes 5 minutes to learn for a lifetime, that's still 5*500/60 = 42 hours of time. Perhaps it would be much more efficient to review the single card that generated random problems each time.
I suppose part of this discussion is just about whether 40 hours is a long time or not :). I think of it as being a long time, so the idea of a strategy being slightly inefficient bothers me. But your point about reddit applies to me too---I definitely have "wasted" waay over 40 hours in my life. -- Ben ----------------- Original message ----------------- From: Gwern Branwen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 21:59:57 -0400 ... Well, hold on. Why wouldn't it make sense? We're technically inclined folks, it wouldn't be hard for us to write a quick script or macro to generate, say, 500 random cards which ask us to multiply abc by xyz, and import them at grade 4 or 5. Which is your mind going to do - get good at multiplying 2 3 digit numbers (generate on-demand), or memorize 500 different multiplication problems (memoize)? True, Mnemosyne won't enforce the 30-second stricture, but review has always required honesty of the user. (From my experience with multiple subtle variants on a card, the mind gives up after just a few and falls back on a problem-solving approach - - which is exactly what one wants to exercise, in this case.) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mnemosyne-proj-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mnemosyne-proj-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
