Re: Death and Berevement

Sure, I'll start one or two use-cases on this.

Harry Halpin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Alex Korth<alex@ttbc.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This issue is feature that an ID provider, who is dedicated to take care of
>> your stuff and who has access to it, is the right entity to provide.
>> In general and as said, users need reach control over their content. If a
>> service is given access to content that is hosted by the user's IDP, this
>> access must be revokeable if the user changes his mind. It's a life cycle of
>> access that ends somewhen. To me it is straight forward for the IDP to ask
>> the user what should happen to his content when he dies. Who cares if an
>> account is not deleted? It's the party pics that must go offline!
>> There is another aspect at the end of content's lifecycle that's strongly
>> related to the issue of a user passing away: forgetting. Our brains have a
>> feature to forget outdated stuff to free memory.
> 
> Sounds like a rather depressing, but useful, use-case. For example,
> one might want their content to become a sort of electronic memorial
> for oneself, which does mean embarassing party pics must go, but
> family members might want to add new photos, use the "wall" to share
> memories, and the like. Anyone want to write this up?
> 
>> »And because we forget, all the embarassing things we did 10 years ago, are
>> forgotten. We are different beings now and thus, this information is
>> outdated. One can also understand this brain feature as a natural filter.
>> But I am no biologist. ;)
>> However, this might be approached technically, or by a licence which expires
>> automatically or on demand. Imagine a CC-by-1week. I am no expert in the
>> licences domain. Is there something appropriate or something close?«
>> (commented on DanBri's http://danbri.org/words/2009/07/23/423 Dan, this is
>> still awaiting moderation?)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Alex
>>
>> Tim Anglade wrote:
>>> Interesting (if slightly morbid) point.
>>>
>>> The issue is of definite interest nonetheless, if only because of the
>>> varying industry practices on the subject.
>>>
>>> Currently, I'm only aware of two major services who take this eventuality
>>> into account:
>>> * Facebook urges you to “memorialize” the deceased's page [1]. Apparently,
>>> if you can *prove* you're the next of kin, they'll let you delete the
>>> account [2];
>>> * MySpace lets you delete it permanently [3].
>>>
>>> Le 26 juil. 09 à 21:39, Phil Archer a écrit :
>>>
>>>> What I can't work out is whether this is something that might be part of
>>>> a future standardisation track - or simply a commercial opportunity for
>>>> someone. In which case, why the heck am I sending this to a public list?
>>>>  ;-)
>>> Another good call. Considering how Americans are signing up for id-theft
>>> protection and the like, I could see a smallish industry of e-undertakers
>>> cropping up. Something like a nominal or sub-$10 yearly fee in exchange for
>>> a prompt removal (or advantageous e-embalming) of your accounts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=deceased
>>> [2] http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/090224-113022
>>> [3] http://faq.myspace.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/369/kw/dead/r_id/100061
>>>
>>> - - - - - - -
>>> Tim Anglade | directeur, pôle « Turbulences » | af83
>>> 42, boulevard de Sébastopol | 75003 Paris | France
>>> 1436, Howard St | San Francisco | CA 94103 | USA
>>> Tel : +33 1 42 72 33 32
>>> Mob : +33 6 35 92 77 58
>>> skype : tim_anglade
>>> Web : www.af83.com
>>>
>>> This email is:  [X] bloggable   [ ] ask first   [ ] private
>>>
>> --
>> Alexander Korth
>> www.twitter.com/alexkorth
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Alexander Korth
www.twitter.com/alexkorth

Received on Monday, 27 July 2009 10:29:43 UTC