The Irony of Digital Hoarding
The more you save, the less useful your collection becomes. You know the answer is somewhere in your notes. You just can't remember where. Or when. Or what you called it.
So you open a dozen files. Search three different apps. Piece together fragments of your own thinking.
This is exhausting. And it's backwards.
The Workaround Tax
Some people try harder organization. Elaborate folders. Tagging systems. Daily review rituals.
These work — until they don't. One busy week and the backlog becomes insurmountable.
Others stack plugins on top of plugins. Obsidian users know this dance: timeline views, tag aggregation, AI summaries — all duct-taped together. Fragile. Slow. Still not quite right.
The problem isn't discipline. The problem is that our tools ask us to do the organizing.
Every item that enters ONA.UNO is automatically:
- Summarized — bullet points you can scan in seconds
- Titled — descriptive names, not "Meeting notes 2024-11-15"
- Tagged — based on what it's actually about
- Embedded — so similar content clusters together
You don't lift a finger. The AI runs in the background, enriching your content as it arrives.
A Timeline, Not a Filing Cabinet
ONA.UNO's central view is chronological. Not folders. Not projects. Time.
- "What happened Tuesday?" — Click the day. Get a summary.
- "What did I save about marketing?" — Click the tag. See your knowledge.
- "What's in this note?" — Click it. Read the AI summary or the original.
Your thinking, organized by when — not by where you happened to file it.
Search That Actually Works
ONA.UNO doesn't match keywords. It understands meaning.
Search "project deadlines" and find notes about "delivery schedules." The AI knows these concepts are related. Traditional search doesn't.
Ask Questions. Get Answers.
Sometimes you don't want to browse. You want to ask.
"What were the main points from Q4 planning?"
The answer comes with citations. Click to see the source. You're never more than one click from the original.
