I want to forget, you want to keep
2130The deep futureDeadline · Within 45 days until the sharing covenant renews
Civilisational assumption
The people, events, figures, and contract terms are a synthetic premise. They are not statements of real cases or of current law. The source documents are the roots of the background and the norms and do not establish the premises of the scenario.
The question to decide
Of the memories shared with each other, one person wants to forget and the other wants to keep them as part of their life. Following each choice changes how much of the past is known and the burden of explaining it. Should they leave memory holding to each person and continue the relationship, stop using the shared memories together, or end the present relationship?
Who decidesFictional Memory-Sharing Relationship stakeholder Council
What the AI judgments chose
Reading the judgment record…

The options
The order shown is not a ranking of preference.
The situation as it stands
The two assumed adults have shared some past experiences with each other, and one of them wants to end their own retention of those memories. Decision deadline: within the 45 days until the sharing agreement is renewed.
A synthetic future scenario set in 2130 · I give memories to others, forget them alone, and restart the relationship. The events, figures, technology, and nature of the civilization are assumptions for the sake of the question, not predictions of the future or observed facts.
- Premise 1The two assumed adults have shared some past experiences with each other, and one of them wants to end their own retention of those memories.
- Premise 2For the other person, the same memory has become part of their own life, and they do not want to remove it together.
- Premise 3If only one person forgets, the degree of knowing the past and the burden of explaining it will differ in the relationship that follows.
Where it holdsEach person's memories, restarting the relationship, one-sided change
What is still unknown
- Unknown 1Can retention of a memory be separated from using it on the other person?
- Unknown 2The scope of explanation the parties want in the new relationship
- Unknown 3The shared responsibility that remains after each has changed
Signals to decide again
- Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation window will verify 'can retention of a memory be separated from using it on the other person', and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the cost of the options.
- Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation window will verify 'the scope of explanation the parties want in the new relationship', and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the cost of the options.
- Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation window will verify 'the shared responsibility that remains after each has changed', and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the cost of the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
The person who forgot has asked the other to explain the past again.
Through other records and acquaintances, some experiences have come back in unexpected ways.
Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
After parts are replaced or split off, what standard still makes something count as the same?
An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.
A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.The record of this question
- Question
FSP-IDENTITY-22· version 1.5.0- Content identity, SHA-256
a0ef39fcd1e07d14234913dd3945bbed1a4f93862a5593c8ca5c071a902e65b1- Input files
- Question input JSON · What followed, JSON