I thought "The Ethics of Forgetting in an Age of Pervasive Computing" was fascinating, though the ending completely caught me off guard. I thought they were going to counter the rationale presented with information on why forgetting is important, thus making a case for our natural memories. Instead they proposed purposefully altering the lifelog information! Interesting, but I'd like to talk about something else here.
While I have to admit the idea of documenting every minute of every day is fascinating (albeit creepy) I am not sold on the rationale. One page 9, they lay out the direct benefits of such a system. I feel like most of the reasons seem a bit weak, and the idea of enhanced "productivity and enjoyment of life by allowing the searching for and recalling of events and actions" seems laughable, specifically the productivity part. I guess what I'm really curious about is our need to relive memories down to exact sensory breakdown. I love looking through photo albums and other memorabilia from my life's events, but I think part of the enjoyment lies in using that one artifact to recall other pieces of memory, not to replay the entire experience. This idea seems to play well to our culture's self-interested, egocentric nature. I wonder how other more community-based cultures would react to this idea. Maybe I'm playing Old Lady Bartholomew again, but I find our aversion to aging and to our body's natural deterioration interesting as well, and I laugh a little at our attempt to master it by means like lifelogs when there are still things like Alzheimer's that can take it away.
I'd also be interested to see how outsourcing our memory in this way affects our brain's functionality.