"'I would like lifeblogging to become a verb."
Hmm. I guess it's inevitable, but I really don't think this "lifeblogging" thing is going to go anywhere. My thoughts:
1. Most blogs are dull. Dull, dull, dull. It's one thing to blog about a particular subject, but as people point out time and time again, keeping a record of your own activities is appealing to an extremely limited audience, and is probably more novelty than genuine interest. A "Lifeblog" would be utterly dire - why would I want to see somebody else's life highlights? Why would anyone want to see mine?
2. People seem to have a tendency to charge into this whole "blogging" idea without any sense of how public it is. When the guy running the "Warm Coccoon" blog on the right found out someone had linked ot him randomly, he got very paranoid. People publish their blogs publically, expecting access control lists to somehow appear magically, and then wonder why someone knows what's in their brain the next day. (Well, I wonder that, anyway ;)
3. Why haven't photo phones taken off? Sure, they're everywhere, but people don't make a big thing of them. Or maybe they do, and I just hang out in the wrong circles. Anyway, novelty value again, I claim. There are only so many dark, fuzzy, pictures you can take before getting on with it. I think lifeblogging could be the same - why bother recording everything if nobody really cares about it?
4. It's a stupid name. Why must people construct Trademarks around the "blog" abbreviation? Plus it's not on the web, initially ("weblog", you see). It might become a "lifeblog" after you publish selected items, but the main idea of an ongoing, off-line timeline is more of a... timeline. Lifestream. Whatever you want to call it.
And another thing - the number of subjects covered by blogs is, IMHO, very very small, compared to the number of subjects covered by, say, the web, or newsgroups. Or if they are covered, they're in nowhere near as much supply. I guess this relates to the first point.