[zibby8]

CPUs don't have logic or reason, so it's not a good analogy. E.g. you can replace an infinite set of memories by distilling them into a few bits of knowledge that underpin that given set of experiences.

[jvanderbot]

I don't think an analogy is meant to be factually equivalent, it is meant to convey meaning. I perfectly understood the meaning of the parent comment, even if it is technically inaccurate.

We aren't trying to understand minds or caches, we're trying to encourage a practice that has little to do with the inner workings of either.

[ilyazub]

Good point. Reminds me "All models are wrong, but some are useful"[1].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong

[orangepurple]

Analogies are almost always flawed but they are powerful tools for forming strong associative memories.

They are a starting point for encoding new knowledge in a custom symbolic language known only to yourself. It is the basis for all learning.

Some other major tools for learning are mnemonics and spaced repetition.

[dekhn]

CPUs have logic, and programs can do reasoning. And that's now how the brain works (if you mean generalization).