Digital Death Day #1 Closing Circle

Evan Carroll
Orignally open source model Forever drifted to conv value of both temporal and personal What is value of you today may not be tomorrow and vice versa
Do we choose what to preserve and curate a legacy? (fewer is higher value)
But having too much data is a problem we coudl solve with technology. Did not come to an agreement
Lots of tangents and examples. Notes by Stacey

Death care side
Tried to id what industries should be forefront in talking about digial death and assets.
Concluded can’t just pinpoint funeral industry or estate mgt, it is whoever is first point of contact.
Who owns digital assets? Joint husband and wife?
Some deep questions without imm answers that will provide stepping stones to future conversations
Some intangibie things like accounts will be very valuable

To conclude Digital Death Day on May 20th, 2010 we invited everyone to share some reflections.

Kathleen Lane: Importance of having some kind of decision policy to decide what is assets
Next step, try to get this or some other group to create policies in right direction

Gordon Clark: He was in several sessions. Glad people interested in Family search services. Recording activity as it happens: Session had lots of ideas, like loggin all unser input. LEarned abou new FB streams, JSON aggregators Other thing brought up is parental control soft could keep track of activities. PErsistent urls would aid keeping track

Other session: What a web hosting co should do? Have verbiage in tOS about inheritance etc. Could be new templates for Creative Commons.

Steve Schmull?: Sessions he attended came down to legal, need for new laws and precedent. Thinks this needs to be established as precondition. If policies developed could become law.

Cam Hunt: More clearly realized difference between capability and data we want to preserve. Also made him think about his personal curation and how to protect other peoples interests

Josh Hunt: How do we determine what law is. Discussion gets down to basic terms. Tried to boil down what needs to be done first off. What are we doing as a society for data? Until answered can’t develop law. So law lagging technology.

Pierre Wolff: Who can introduce the information to the families? Estate or financial or funeral planners? WRT law, interesting things came out: idea that depending on classification of asset, it may not be yours to dispose of. You may not have a right to do what you want! How complicated could this get? There is concept of “Future Descendant Authorization” : rights to descendants you don’t even know yet. Wow!

Nate Entrustet: most interesting sessions were brainstorming terms of service that would fit with what people want to do. E.g. direction to delete property or other

Guy in blue shirt and glasses:: Impressed how early stage this stuff is. Not sure if people will be interested in everything I’ve ever done. So many unanswered questions, good to get many perspectives, knowledge tools today.

Eli: Learned a lot! Was also in legal context session on TOS. Death beneficiary clause to avoid probate complications. Ran first own unconf session on managing multiple identities after death. May want to hide things, or keep them in certain family, busines, or other context.

Stacey P: Great to meet other people doing this kind fo work. Session she ran was really informative. Good to chat about sociological, anthropological, ethnographic viewpoints.

Nate: Property distinction is key. Ownership is 90% of stuff we deal with. professionals here each had their own viewpoint, lawyers, funeral directors, etc. Josh said laws are written generally because lobbyists bend ears. Here they will come from big service providers, may not have users interests in mind. Will not want to be constrained by legal protection, would prefer to continue to impose their own TOS. Looking forward to future collaboration.

Kaliya: Death legacy is another angle on data ownership – in identity community we work on ownership of own data by the living, but this may be valuable also in gaining protections. Cross-industry collaboration could be effective, let’s work on it. Move on to how to continue the conversation? Group here was small but an amazing cross section. What kind of outreach do we want to do? And what conversation do we want to continue from here online?

How do we keep the Digital Death Day (DDD) effort going? how does community take stewardship of this process? what does the next event look like?…or do we get other communities involved or pitch at their events?

How do we keep the discussion going online?

  • Google Group to continue the conversation.
  • Need to get more money into the group?
  • Follow-up event at the end of the next IIW.

Piggy-back on other associations’ events.

  • American Law Institute in Madison, WI (2nd week of June)
  • Eckerling in Miami, FL
  • UPPO (Unclaimed Property Practioner Organization)
  • Nat’l Unclaimed Property Administrators
  • National Funeral Directors Association
  • Int’l Cemetery & Cremation Funeral Association
  • Internet Identity Workshop
  • E.U.-UK/US Skype link in order to enable discussions between DDD groups in the EU and the US.
  • Consider creating a .ORG to carry the banner for the issues of the DDD
  • the Identity Commons service can enable groups to operate autonomously w/o having to create a DDD org. Kaliya can help facilitate that.
  • Is Digital Death Day the right name? –> Arrested Pixel –> Digital Afterlife
  • How closed or open should this group be? –> can we have a public space and a private space? –> require people who want to be involved in participating to make the effort to request participation. –> use Keith Teare’s “” blog aggregation service to get blogs fm the various folks talking about this issue feeding into the site. –> resource site w/links the various related services
  • Create support for “piggy-back” events.
  • Kathy to lead effort for next estate planning group in CA. Cam to lead effort for next IIW event in Washington DC.
  • Blog aggregation editors: Eli Edwards & Evan Carroll.
  • Need a way for people to provide email address for signing up to e-newsletters and notifications from the organization.
  • Does an association w/Identity Commons dependence frame how others see what we are trying to do? –> one response was “it’s a positive association” –> another response was “we need to keep our design very independent”
  • Stacey will work on a design of our logo.
  • Pierre will begin reach out to some of the large social media companies to get to the right people who need to be involved in the conversation.
  • Kaliya will include every one on to an email list and send out request for opting out of having DDD participants email addresses shared with the group.
  • Kaliya and Nate will pursue discussion on moving forward w/initial piggy-back event.
  • Stacey will circulate a “mood board”.
  • Co-administrator to approve applications for email list: Cam & Stacey [Kaliya]
This entry was posted in DDD#1, session notes. Bookmark the permalink.