Recall that in Buddhism, "you" do not exist. The prevailing doctrine in Buddhism is anatman, no-self or no-soul. "You" do not even exist moment from moment, and "you" are just a constellation of desires, attachments, influences, conditions, etc., all of which are temporary. Thus, even if "you" are reborn - if "you" subjectively perceive yourself to exist again - "you" will have undergone so many changes from one condition to the other as to not effectively remember any of them anyway; a conscious core may endure death, but it will be so changed as to not functionally be you any longer. And rebirth, among those Buddhists who do believe in it, is seen as a "failure" state - you are reborn because you still possess desires, attachments, and so on.
For Hindus, on the other hand, there is a core self which transmigrates, but this transmigration is not instantaneous, and the physical life is ephemeral. You will undergo so many experiences in the afterlife that your current biological existence will be functionally irrelevant to your future existence, except for the karma which you have cultivated today. There are so many different possible and fundamentally incompatible forms of being in Hinduism that you cannot recall them all, because the memories are incompatible with you as you are now.
In neither view is rebirth/reincarnation taken to be a good thing.
And of course there is the atheistic reincarnation theorem, which I hold to - Poincare's recurrence theorem. Which states that you, exactly as you are, will exist again as the universe cycles through a finite but nearly-unlimited number of possible states. Which, clearly, is not a good thing from your perspective if you're on this forum.