Explore personal AI context on MindMemory.si, with explicit consent, portable preferences, source provenance, sharing previews and meaningful deletion controls.
A Personal Context Layer With Boundaries
MindMemory.si could provide reusable context across AI assistants through a user-controlled vault. Approved preferences and project background could be shared selectively instead of repeating instructions. It would concern digital personalization, not medical memory enhancement, cognitive treatment or diagnosis.
.SI is officially Slovenia's country-code top-level domain. Synthetic intelligence is a creative brand interpretation only. The mind prefix would be naming, not a clinical claim. These boundaries should be clear before requesting personal information.
Store Preferences as Reviewable Records
Records could include origin, approval state, sharing scope and expiry. Explicitly entered preferences should remain distinct from suggestions inferred from conversations. Several short replies do not establish that a user always prefers brevity. Suggested memories would await approval or dismissal.
Provenance would show which source produced a record. Context-specific preferences could coexist: concise work updates and detailed study explanations are compatible. Conflict resolution should ask what applies to a task instead of flattening changing needs into a permanent universal profile.
Preview Sharing and Support Portability
Before transmission, users could inspect selected records and why they match the request. Work and personal contexts would remain separate, with temporary permissions expiring after a task. Recurring access would stay visible in a connection list.
Exports should include documented fields, stable identifiers, dates and scopes alongside readable summaries. Imports would detect duplicates and ask about conflicts. The MemoryNetwork.si federation concept offers an architectural comparison, but compatibility with external assistants requires actual specifications and testing, not a branding assumption.
Deletion Must Include Derived Context
Removing a visible note is insufficient if embeddings, summaries or caches retain it. A deletion workflow could suppress retrieval immediately and track removal of affected representations. Backup retention and queued synchronization jobs would need explicit treatment.
External assistants may already hold shared copies. Disconnecting should stop future access without implying remote erasure. The product could submit supported deletion requests but cannot promise historical copies disappear without enforceable mechanisms. Users should see these distinctions in status messages, not only legal text.
Start With Consent, Not Ambient Collection
An MVP could be a manually maintained vault with approval prompts, export and one limited connection. Continuous microphones, inbox ingestion and health inference would stay outside scope. Synthetic-profile pilots could test correction, revocation and receiving-tool interpretation.
Imported documents must remain untrusted data, unable to change permissions. Operational choices include encryption, session controls and account recovery trade-offs. Local-first storage may reduce centralized collection while complicating synchronization and lost-device recovery. Those trade-offs should be described rather than hidden behind a privacy claim.
Business Models and Honest Limitations
Subscriptions, encrypted synchronization or consent-aware developer tools could be possible models. Advertising based on intimate records would conflict with a user-control proposition. The MindSecurity.si governance concept offers related permission-review ideas, not an affiliation.
Accurate records can still be retrieved in the wrong context. Expiry reminders, overrides and memory-free sessions would keep personalization optional. The brandable-name guide and MindMemory.si listing provide naming context separately; the domain does not establish perfect recall or medical benefit.