How is permanent archiving different from the existing setup. As far as I understand, Instapaper already saved it's version of the article to your account, and I've never seen it lose anything because of a missing underlying article.
Are you saving the underlying article as pinboard does?
Longtime Instapaper fan here, the parser remains excellent and has kept up with all the newest shenanigans of the web over time much to my delight.
I was able to answer my own question via their Zendesk (from 2016), for those interested. It looks like I just had not come across the issue, but articles were previously not being saved server side with the exception of those manually emailed.
This is a really interesting question. I just tried playing with it for a bit, and I was able to approximate this for a fair number of emails (and with a large helping of kludgyness) by sorting the search results by subject which puts no subject emails at the top.
Of course within that pile is down to scanning.
I see why it's tricky since the search is indexed, but it does feel like there might be a way.
Those nags can be moderated or turned off by about:config flags or policy.json lines, I forget which at the moment. They used to drive me insane as well.
Growing up outside the US, black currant was the third default flavor of ice cream after vanilla and chocolate. Having strawberry fill that role here still seems like a missed opportunity for something slightly more bitter in the lineup of your average tiny one cart ice cream vendor on a beach or similar.
Engineering as a noun versus as a verb really threw me for a loop on this one.
The methodology is cool, the scale of the experiment is very cool (16k meetings), the conclusion is kinda workmanlike - as if the question was specifically 'is shared knowledge necessary to generate new ideas'.
"Overall, this study takes a critical step towards identifying the processes that explain when serendipitous encounters shape knowledge production outcomes among innovating individuals.
We show that brief, information-rich interactions between people with some overlapping knowledge interests can have a productive effect on knowledge transfer, creation and diffusion."
This tertiary point was distracting as well, seems out of place.
"Third, we make methodological contributions by highlighting the benefits of long-term studies that amalgamate multiple forms and uses of data. Prospective experiments can support multiple lines of investigation involving both near-term and long-term outcomes that may not be possible in retrospective, archival studies and suggests the use of multiple sources of data for unpacking the dynamics of knowledge production."
The take away I got was that people whose fields are too similar don’t knowledge share and generate good knowledge creation nearly as well as situations where the knowledge transfer is with someone with only “some” overlapping interests.
Ie there is a Goldilocks zone for knowledge creation that involves some, but not too many, overlapping interests between collaborators.
It kinda makes sense once you think about it, but was nice to see the sophistication they took to show it experimentally. (But I’m not an expert, this isn’t my field and I only spent 5 minutes skimming the first portions of it.)
Considering that yesterday in a meeting I was casually arguing for peer groups within an scattered enterprise, perhaps time would be better spent with something less rivalrous like semi-peer groups? Too much of a shared interest is actually a bad thing? Worth thinking about.
Believe it or not, Plex. It's a truly mediocre photo organizer, with glaring missing features, but because I already have a Plex server - it's zero marginal work aside from just dropping the photos in a folder on the NAS running it.
I use FileBrowser to autosync the photos off my phone, and family can easily access them because they already know how to use Plex. The fact that there is a client for every device I have ever used is icing on the cake.
If you have a plex server, obviously a very big if, worth investigating just turning it on for a folder of files since it doesnt write to the images itself by default.
They have made it clear it is not a focus, and killed features, but that all seemed in the interest of making it something that continued to function without much work on their end. Which seems fair enough.
