Seriously, porn organization is the 1 thing I haven't been able to master over the years. A way to detect what your current preferences are and map them to a video or image set would be revolutionary.
The only part there that seems like it's actually hard (ooh er) is encoding information about the content of a given video or image file; I don't see any better way to do that than tagging by hand, which is going to take a while for a sizable archive.
Once that's done, it seems like keeping track of frequency and recency of access, plus user ratings which gradually go stale over time in order to model familiarity breeding disinterest, should suffice to give you the rest. In order to avoid the complexity of hooking into whatever image/video viewer you use, you could run your ratings collector as a background process which uses inotify or your local equivalent to keep track of accesses to the files under curation, and by some method decide when to request you input ratings. (I'm seeing a notification area icon with a bubble popup saying "Click here to rate the last 15 porn videos you watched." This thought amuses me, God knows why.)
Then it's just a matter of asking for more of what you've been watching lately, or stuff you haven't seen lately that matches some collection of tagged interests, or what-have-you. I don't know what you use as a UI for your porn collection, but a simple first approximation might be filling up a temp directory with symlinks to the content matching a given query, and then popping up a file browser on the directory -- in any modern OS, this should give you a pretty good overview, thumbnails and all.
A way to organize anything at all would be a nice start. The real problem is people trying to force arbitrary relationships into hierarchical models always results in mediocre solutions. When are we going to start taking graph databases seriously? (+ Graph filesystems)
I'm really interested in this idea as I suffer from the same problem on my local disk in addition to having years worth of documents across a DropBox account, SkyDrive, and two Google Drive accounts.
What are your biggest gripes? What model would you like to see? A tag based filesystem? Arbitrary graph?
Would love to talk to people such as yourself who have this problem.
I am working on a project to categorise your files/code projects. You can give them tags, comments, and then sort them in that way. I want to see something like this for any type of data, and I think graph databases would be a good thing to explore!
It's not quite done, and I will be making demo videos eventually but if you are curious check it out!
I'd like to see arbitrary graph based systems where there's no restriction on the relationships you can create - although doing so takes more work than dumping things into hierarchies. Tag based systems are useful for making the transition to graphs, but they're really just "patching" graph-like semantics onto trees - as are things like symbolic links in file systems.
Relationships are largely arbitrary, and what is meaningful to one person may not be to another. In order to have an effective system, I think it would need both a distributed and local component, such that there is this large, distributed graph of knowledge of relationships, which you can download and cache parts of selectively - and which you can add your own relationships to, and chose which of those you wish to share. By collectively sharing relationship, we can form consensus models which converge around specific kinds of ontologies - which could be used to optimise storage and querying for local caches of such boundaries.
My biggest gripe is perhaps this idea of bottom-up-schema creation, in which we try to conjure up a model of relationships which may work based on our limited knowledge of the models we want to express. Instead, the graph based approach gives us a top-down-approach, where all the relationships are visible, but where we focus on specific relationships to build an ontology, then optimise our problem around it.
Filesystems in the traditional sense are far too limiting in that they already push a bottom-up schema on you - that of files, and much of the data you want to organize isn't files anyway. The filesystem is useful though, and necessary to remain compatible with existing systems - but I think it should take the top-down approach, where for example, you'd have some FUSE module which accesses part of a larger graph database, and only cares about the file specific relationships or ontologies.
I'm no expert on graph theory, and I've only played around with the ideas a bit using existing graph databases (Titan, Orient, rel etc) and querying languages like Gremlin and Datalog. I also have a few dozen databases I've made with Postgres in order to map the relations I care about with refeences to external information sources (e.g musicbrainz) - some of which are not "open" in the sense that you'd want them in a distributed system, because they require sign-ups to central services in order to manipulate them.
I've also looked at various attempts to build systems like this, but the majority are proprietary systems, or centralized in some way or another, and I've not discovered a sane way to locally cache the data I want without taking whole copies of the databases.
At present there's just too much for me to learn and research, and not the time or motivation to do it - partly because I feel it would need to be a collaborative, free software project, as the profit motive is largely incompatible with the need for a distributed system - and I'm too focused on making a living right now.
Seriously, porn organization is the 1 thing I haven't been able to master over the years. A way to detect what your current preferences are and map them to a video or image set would be revolutionary.