Why would I lifestream without caching?
January 20th, 2008
One lifestreaming article that I actually found surprising was about lifecaching. I agree completely with that article, so why was it surprising? Because I hadn't considered caching to be optional. Sucking in all that data and saving it in a system that I control is a fundamental requirement. It's the first step, not an add-on feature.
(Hm. Does lifestream work as a verb?)
Here's a 
January 22nd, 2008 at 07:48 AM I'm glad you enjoyed my article - I have a few follow-ups to that article that I need to pound out - such as different ways of actually caching the data. I can say reading a couple of your earlier that you are not late to the life streaming party. While I agree life streaming is useful, important, and mostly neat. Life caching is the evolutionary transition that will need to occur as the data portability movement takes place. Tools unfortunately to do any type of life caching are terrible at this time. I have some wordpress plugins that I 'm cutting my PHP learning teeth on that have lots of bugs that I need to streamline - if the object of most of these plugins came from the lifestreaming design instead of spam blog design (repurposing RSS feeds can go both ways) then this small faction of belief in saving our own data can grow. Dang - sometimes I'm just too long winded. P.S. Lifestreaming is becoming a verb maybe in a few more years it will be up there with w00t and in the dictionary.
January 22nd, 2008 at 05:57 PM
I look forward to reading your thoughts... I'll be putting some tools out there myself as I get working on them and make them useful.