It's pretty obvious when you have this. Semi-popular video game journalist Tim Rogers has it, and you wouldn't mistake anyone else's work for his as a result.

(There was a time maybe 10 years ago when people tried to do something called "new games journalism" basically imitating him, and it was mostly just embarrassing for everyone involved, because normal people can't construct a review of something entirely out of personal anecdotes.)

It doesn't really work that way. For instance, if you're discussing something with your boss, and you have perfect recall about what was discussed 6+ months ago, but your boss disagrees with you, they will just use their version of previous events as the reference of record. People tend to get angry when you disagree with their version of past events.

It's a lot like the myth of Cassandra -- doomed to be able to foretell the future, but nobody believed her. Doomed to remember the past, but nobody ever believes you. Everyone is 100% committed to their own version of the past that lives in their head.

What's the advantage?

Its uncontrollability makes it as much of a blessing as a curse in a way not dissimilar to ADHD's hyperfocus phenomenon. Memories are the brain's interpretation of reality and therefore not always reliable, the ability cannot be switched on or off at will, and other people don't always appreciate or understand it which leads to many awkward situations.