Or something. I don’t have the attention span to actually read the article. Or the short article summarizing the article. Or, really, to write a proper blog post about the short article summarizing the article.

I know I think of memory first as query structures. I’d be hooped if teh googel went down.

From [Kyle Niemeyer’s summary of the article](http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/07/study-why-bother-to-remember-when-you-can-just-use-google.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss):
>The results from all four experiments suggest that people expect computerized information to be continuously available, and actually remember less when they know they’ll have access to it later. We also seem to remember where we can find information instead of the information itself.

Duh. Again, this isn’t exactly a novel finding. But having some experimental data showing how we remember and search for stuff will come in handy.

Of course, Papers is also to blame for the tall stack of papers to read. It makes it almost **too easy** to find articles.

A giant list of 96 papers with 33 new additions becomes a filtered list of 31 papers to read first, sorted by “importance”. Now, if I had an iPad to read the papers without being tethered to a computer (or killing a forest of trees, and draining several unicorns of their blood for inkjet printer cartridges…)