So, SRS algorithms are such that the more you try to get the optimality, the more the returns diminish because there's significant variability in the human population (bias-variance tradeoff sort of applies). The Ebbinghaus curve itself is a very crude approximation.
(I'm a language learner and an active user of SRS)
The notion of an outdated algorithm corresponding to worse or better results to me is neither here nor there. There's evidence that the repetition interval itself is not the critical factor in retention. Empirically we know there are things that we remember with 0 repetitions (the vivid details of a traumatic event), while other things we struggle to remember even with SRS when there's no emotional connection to what is being memorized.
When you're doing self-hacking, you have to understand you're working on a highly variable, complex adaptive system that defies optimality and exactness. Much of what is known are approximations.
See this:
https://languagelearning.stackexchange.com/questions/3757/wh...
(I'm a language learner and an active user of SRS)
The notion of an outdated algorithm corresponding to worse or better results to me is neither here nor there. There's evidence that the repetition interval itself is not the critical factor in retention. Empirically we know there are things that we remember with 0 repetitions (the vivid details of a traumatic event), while other things we struggle to remember even with SRS when there's no emotional connection to what is being memorized.
When you're doing self-hacking, you have to understand you're working on a highly variable, complex adaptive system that defies optimality and exactness. Much of what is known are approximations.