6 ms·

2 years ago, I embarked on a project to clean my 10 year old Gmail mailbox to reach Inbox Zero, much like I have been doing at work. The first few weeks were s

2 years ago, I embarked on a project to clean my 10 year old Gmail mailbox to reach Inbox Zero, much like I have been doing at work. The first few weeks were spent using filters to delete all the junk like Newsletters, Flash Sales, Social Media Notifications, etc. The remainder was all the personal correspondence. For nearly a year afterwards, I would look through all the correspondence for a given month, and delete or archive based on how meaningful things were. I came across gems like the following: - Planning my wedding - Coming up with baby names - Celebrating my wife's completion of grad school - Younger siblings getting their first jobs - Threads with multiple people for planning a friend's bachelor party, surprise birthday parties, etc. - Conversations with friends who have since passed away. This stuff was archived and labeled "Precious". I highly recommend that everyone go through this process. I plan to do it again once a year from here on out.

isomorphic 12y ago
The thing the article is missing is that algorithms will hopefully improve along with storage capacity. That is, Google may be able to infer what is "Precious" nearly as well as you can. The question is whether Google will offer us that capability, or keep it for itself.
- hkarthik 12y ago
  I think the technology and capabilities likely exist for Google or any other entity to do this classification for us. But it's a slippery slope. Do we want machine learning algorithms to show us what to care about? Won't that somehow cheapen the uniquely human experience of sifting through your own data and correlating it with your memories and emotions at the time?
  - akharris 12y ago
    That's where we start slipping into the philosophical aspect of the conversation. I don't know that a computer will ever be as good at discerning meaning from our communication as we are - partly because a lot of the meaning is because we say so, not necessarily because of something inherent. But could they get to 50%? 90%? I hope so, because the load is so huge.
- akharris 12y ago
  I hope you're right, and that's what I'm getting at with "something on the table." Right now, the pace of storage is increasing so much faster than the algorithms to infer meaning.
- zo1 12y ago
  At the very least Google is now currently separating out stuff that is definitely not "precious". I used to never look at my inbox until they started taking out all the updates, newsletters, etc into separate tabs. Leaving my inbox relatively movement-free and with only very important things.
nirvdrum 12y ago
I went through the same process recently. I had mixed emotions about it, because I found a lot of correspondence that I'd have rather forgotten. I'm a different person than when I was in high school or college. I remember what I was like back then, but having a direct paper trail for the last 16 years was weird. From minute things like how bad my grammar was to silly things like stuff I said to sound cool. Of course, there was a lot of good in there too. I retained some and purged most. I decided even if flawed, I'd rather just keep my memory as it is than relive every event from my past. It's sort of the mentality of just watching the concert while you're there rather than watch it through your phone so you have a video of it later. I'm sure I'm losing something in the process, but it's a gamble I'm willing to take. On a side note, it was interesting to see just how much of the Web has changed since then. A lot of emails were just links being passing around and the vast majority of those links were dead.
- jcrites 12y ago
  > A lot of emails were just links being passing around and the vast majority of those links were dead. True. I find it rather depressing. I save a permanent copy (with full text search, content, and styling) of every article that's sufficiently interesting that I may want to read it later.
drivingmenuts 12y ago
Sometime in January of 2015, I'll do the same thing I do every January - nuke everything from 2014. I don't get a lot of very personal email and most of what I do receive really only makes sense in the context at the time. I'm also not terribly sentimental about many things, due to my particular life history. If it's important to me, I'll deal with it. If it's important to someone else, they'll let me know about it.

isomorphic 12y ago

The thing the article is missing is that algorithms will hopefully improve along with storage capacity. That is, Google may be able to infer what is "Precious" nearly as well as you can. The question is whether Google will offer us that capability, or keep it for itself.

hkarthik 12y ago
I think the technology and capabilities likely exist for Google or any other entity to do this classification for us. But it's a slippery slope. Do we want machine learning algorithms to show us what to care about? Won't that somehow cheapen the uniquely human experience of sifting through your own data and correlating it with your memories and emotions at the time?
- akharris 12y ago
  That's where we start slipping into the philosophical aspect of the conversation. I don't know that a computer will ever be as good at discerning meaning from our communication as we are - partly because a lot of the meaning is because we say so, not necessarily because of something inherent. But could they get to 50%? 90%? I hope so, because the load is so huge.
akharris 12y ago
I hope you're right, and that's what I'm getting at with "something on the table." Right now, the pace of storage is increasing so much faster than the algorithms to infer meaning.
zo1 12y ago
At the very least Google is now currently separating out stuff that is definitely not "precious". I used to never look at my inbox until they started taking out all the updates, newsletters, etc into separate tabs. Leaving my inbox relatively movement-free and with only very important things.

nirvdrum 12y ago

I went through the same process recently. I had mixed emotions about it, because I found a lot of correspondence that I'd have rather forgotten. I'm a different person than when I was in high school or college. I remember what I was like back then, but having a direct paper trail for the last 16 years was weird. From minute things like how bad my grammar was to silly things like stuff I said to sound cool. Of course, there was a lot of good in there too. I retained some and purged most. I decided even if flawed, I'd rather just keep my memory as it is than relive every event from my past. It's sort of the mentality of just watching the concert while you're there rather than watch it through your phone so you have a video of it later. I'm sure I'm losing something in the process, but it's a gamble I'm willing to take. On a side note, it was interesting to see just how much of the Web has changed since then. A lot of emails were just links being passing around and the vast majority of those links were dead.

jcrites 12y ago
> A lot of emails were just links being passing around and the vast majority of those links were dead. True. I find it rather depressing. I save a permanent copy (with full text search, content, and styling) of every article that's sufficiently interesting that I may want to read it later.

drivingmenuts 12y ago

Sometime in January of 2015, I'll do the same thing I do every January - nuke everything from 2014. I don't get a lot of very personal email and most of what I do receive really only makes sense in the context at the time. I'm also not terribly sentimental about many things, due to my particular life history. If it's important to me, I'll deal with it. If it's important to someone else, they'll let me know about it.