3 ms·

I like the idea, but does it track me? Can you guarantee that it doesn't?

by hazz99 8y ago

anotheryou 8y ago
https://worldbrain.io/ https://worldbrain.io/ does something similar and promises to keep things local with the default settings (and it's open source)
- marver 8y ago
  World brain is a nice concept, and we actually started with building a History Search client side app, spent the first 1,5 years on it. The Startup actually published the story here if you’re interested: https://medium.com/swlh/moments-before-success-or-failure-d0f50ff148ea https://medium.com/swlh/moments-before-success-or-failure-d0... I like what worldbrain is doing, but their extension is a prototype. As you’ll see on their site they’re planning to offer a cloud service; why? Not to spy on people but because of performance and size. They currently have plain-text search, something like ctrl-f. Which is completely understandable because a our full-text search engine is over 3,5 GB, it also requires maintenance. This is without the rest of the app or inxeded data. This is also why we failed with the client side approach, the filesize was huuuuge. We aren’t opensource but we do make all data available to our users for export, and plan to take the way we organize information across a decentralized data source; the web, to new heights. I would suggest to try out the differences and then make a descision that is best for you. Kind regards, Martijn
- convergate 8y ago
  We actually started with a local storage approach too during the first 1,5 year we worked on History Search. The reason why this approach failed is due to the size of the application—it to large have for mainstream devices. If you're interested I've written about our journey more here: https://medium.com/@martijnverbove/moments-before-success-or-failure-d0f50ff148ea https://medium.com/@martijnverbove/moments-before-success-or... I like what Worldbrain is doing but their extension is a prototype. As you will notice they support plain-text search (similar to ctrl-f), and History Search is full-text search and won't impact your device's CPU load or memory. On their website they mention their next version will be cloud-based too. This is not to spy on people but because of the performance demands of a full-text search engine and the applications—this types of services also require maintenance. Just to give an impression; our search engine alone is over 3,5 GB, this doesn't include the app or databases. What I would recommend to try them both out and see which one is best for you.
  - anotheryou 8y ago
    Thanks for the reply! Sadly non-local storage is a no-go for me. I'd rather have a desktop app. But I also understand you'd have a hard time selling desktop apps.

I like the idea, but does it track me? Can you guarantee that it doesn't?

by hazz99 8y ago

I like the idea, but does it track me? Can you guarantee that it doesn't?

https://worldbrain.io/ https://worldbrain.io/ does something similar and promises to keep things local with the default settings (and it's open source)

marver 8y ago
World brain is a nice concept, and we actually started with building a History Search client side app, spent the first 1,5 years on it. The Startup actually published the story here if you’re interested: https://medium.com/swlh/moments-before-success-or-failure-d0f50ff148ea https://medium.com/swlh/moments-before-success-or-failure-d0... I like what worldbrain is doing, but their extension is a prototype. As you’ll see on their site they’re planning to offer a cloud service; why? Not to spy on people but because of performance and size. They currently have plain-text search, something like ctrl-f. Which is completely understandable because a our full-text search engine is over 3,5 GB, it also requires maintenance. This is without the rest of the app or inxeded data. This is also why we failed with the client side approach, the filesize was huuuuge. We aren’t opensource but we do make all data available to our users for export, and plan to take the way we organize information across a decentralized data source; the web, to new heights. I would suggest to try out the differences and then make a descision that is best for you. Kind regards, Martijn
convergate 8y ago
We actually started with a local storage approach too during the first 1,5 year we worked on History Search. The reason why this approach failed is due to the size of the application—it to large have for mainstream devices. If you're interested I've written about our journey more here: https://medium.com/@martijnverbove/moments-before-success-or-failure-d0f50ff148ea https://medium.com/@martijnverbove/moments-before-success-or... I like what Worldbrain is doing but their extension is a prototype. As you will notice they support plain-text search (similar to ctrl-f), and History Search is full-text search and won't impact your device's CPU load or memory. On their website they mention their next version will be cloud-based too. This is not to spy on people but because of the performance demands of a full-text search engine and the applications—this types of services also require maintenance. Just to give an impression; our search engine alone is over 3,5 GB, this doesn't include the app or databases. What I would recommend to try them both out and see which one is best for you.
- anotheryou 8y ago
  Thanks for the reply! Sadly non-local storage is a no-go for me. I'd rather have a desktop app. But I also understand you'd have a hard time selling desktop apps.