The Weird Rise of Cyber Funerals 51
Thanks to recent changes to privacy legislation in Europe and South Korea aimed at protecting the living, we now have more power than ever over our personal information -- even from beyond the grave. While this may have felt like a gimmick in the past, cyber funerals -- where our personal data is removed from the web posthumously -- are slowly becoming a viable option. From a report: Digital undertaking is the act of erasing and tidying up your public data after you die. It's a relatively new idea, but one that's already taking off in South Korea, according to the Korean Employment Information Service. Think of it as a ghoulish version of the European Union's right to be forgotten legislation. For most digital undertakers, the tricky task is to contact the social media companies, search engines or even media companies who publish personal information, and request for it to be deleted when their client dies. If that doesn't work, then companies -- be they in South Korea, the USA or UK -- can bury search engine results by flooding Google with new, conflicting data about the deceased. Santa Cruise, a company based in Seoul, was one of the first in South Korea to take on the task of digital undertaking. Founded in 2008, it was originally an agency for entertainment figures but now specializes in removing personal data from the internet for clients both dead and alive. The company's scope includes digital undertaking and even "reputation management" for those who have been victims of revenge porn.
Real terminators. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of like my brother. His wife didn't want a funeral, not even an obit in the paper. Hell I don't think she even made mention of it on Facebook. So to anyone out of the know, he just ceased to exist.
I don't want/need a funeral myself. If my family want to host one for me, if it makes them feel better, I'd be OK with that... but personally, I don't care if I have a funeral or not... and not just because I'm not dead yet. Even when I'm dead I don't really care if I have a funeral or not.
Re: (Score:1)
"You have just been erased"
Wrong Arnold movie. That one was called "Eraser".
Re: (Score:2)
I can see this type of argument for every major change to media storage.
Clay Tablets to Scrolls. These scrolls can be burned an destroyed (Take a look at the Library of Alexandria)
Scrolls to books, these bindings with labels allow for fast categorization, and allow a large libraries to purge their documents in weeks of some one in charges temper tantrum.
The easier for us to create, categorize and manage data, also makes it easier to destroy.
However, besides historians, there is a lot of junk data. While so
Re: (Score:2)
I think I now have a PHD Thesis idea. The complete history of Fart Jokes.
Re: (Score:2)
You might really want to pare it down to a specific era, or else it is going to take you hundreds of years to complete your thesis.
So like the medical ID bracelet? (Score:4, Funny)
In case of death, delete my browser history.
Re: (Score:2)
In case of death, delete my browser history.
Sure, but only after we review it and have a good laugh first.
Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
I can see the point of locking social accounts so nothing new can be posted, but why go to all this work to try to erase all mentions of the person?
The only case the article really mentions is "spent convictions". Surely the mention of a conviction is more harmful to a person while they're living than once they're dead, so if they didn't try to get it removed while alive, what's the point?
The dead are very valuable to identity thieves. (Score:2, Insightful)
Social media has all this information on people and obituaries have a lot too. Just think what one could do with all that information and pose as the dead guy. You'll know his mother's maiden name, SSN, DOB, addresses, relatives, ....
And one could wreak havoc with the living relatives too.
Posing as dead guy: "I'd like to close the joint account with my wife. Send all the money to this address. Identify myself? Easily. Here ya go!"
Re: (Score:2)
I can see the point of locking social accounts so nothing new can be posted, but why go to all this work to try to erase all mentions of the person?
Surely that belongs in the right of the individual. Not everyone need be erased, but if a certain individual requests it in their will, or the family believes it was the deceased wish it should be allowed.
Honestly, unless it is something of historical, or public noteworthiness; everyone should have the right to have data about themselves curtailed imo; even if they're still alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't only private (personal) information deleted? Why would public information be deleted?
If they really are going that far then I really have to wonder if we aren't setting ourselves up a "digital dark age" where at some point in the future you won't be able to get ANY (past) records because they weren't "worth" keeping.
--
People who get offended at words need to grow the fuck up.
Censoring those who have a different opinion is childish.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect this is cultural. When you pass away, you have the opportunity to delete anything negative about yourself - for the benefit of the greater good (your family).
Sounds this may be roughly equivalent to western debt collection. If a single uncle passes away eyeballs deep in debt, the debt goes away. It doesn't affect me once he's dead.
Only in this case, it's social reputation.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't really matter if he's single, all that matters is if he left behind assets. If so, then the debts potentially affect whoever the assets were left to. If not, then the rest of it doesn't matter.
Re: (Score:2)
People can have their past citizenship used to create years of extra voting in elections.
I wonder if the holders of Hitler's estate (Score:2, Interesting)
will enact this right to be forgotten nonsense.
It's one thing to protect that private info never meant to be released (ie someone secretly webcamming a man or woman jerking off), but this retraction of intentionally public info is vile and orwellian.
Re: (Score:2)
will enact this right to be forgotten nonsense.
It's one thing to protect that private info never meant to be released (ie someone secretly webcamming a man or woman jerking off), but this retraction of intentionally public info is vile and orwellian.
You're calling DELETING data collected about an individual Orwellian? Personally, I find all the companies scraping data about everyone against their will to be far more Orwellian than deleting the data.
As for Hitler, obviously, he is a political and historical figure and cannot be easily "deleted" nor should he. However Bob the baker who has never done anything newsworthy, ought to be allowed to have his private information scrubbed from record.
Why only for the dead? (Score:2)
I want this!
If that doesn't work, then companies -- be they in South Korea, the USA or UK -- can bury search engine results by flooding Google with new, conflicting data about the deceased.
I don't want to die to have this feature available. I want it now!
Fad. (Score:5, Interesting)
This particular fad is diametrically opposed to the previously existing fad of converting social media accounts of the deceased into permanent memorials, like digital gravestones.
Interestingly, more people are cremated than interred in the United States, at 50.2%, and the percentage has been creeping upward for years. Assuming the majority of cremations are voluntary rather than forced by financial necessity, it seems like these folks have found a growth business. At present, the majority of people prefer to have themselves erased rather than memorialized.
Looks like the Internet isn't going to make it easier to be a historian after all. History is more than famous people.
Re: (Score:2)
This particular fad is diametrically opposed to the previously existing fad of converting social media accounts of the deceased into permanent memorials, like digital gravestones.
Either of these scenarios are OK with me, it's about what the wishes of the deceased (and their family).
Looks like the Internet isn't going to make it easier to be a historian after all. History is more than famous people.
I think enough people are not going to want themselves "digitally erased" that it will still be a net-gain for Historians. They may never know about the great Oswald McWeany, he will remain a legend enshrouded in mystery, but plenty of other day-to-day people will leave the trail across the internet.
Re: (Score:1)
That's why I'm going the other way. When I'm gone, all my digital records - emails, social media, photos, all of it - will be made public.
WTF do I care if my friends or family think less of me after I'm gone? That's their problem not mine. Future generations will appreciate how awesome I was.
When I read this title, I thought something else (Score:2)
That is what I first thought was being discussed(I read the article) when I first looked at the title. A funeral where it was web broadcast to everyone, or everyone that would have had to travel.
Filtering tools already remediate this issue (Score:2)
... If that doesn't work, then companies -- be they in South Korea, the USA or UK -- can bury search engine results by flooding Google with new, conflicting data about the deceased. ...
This isn't a new practice, in-and-of-itself; rather, just a new application of existing practices. The thing is, any given attempt to remove (or obfuscate) data inevitably results in counter-measures by those who "just want data to be free." So, just as we already have tools like The Wayback Machine, for looking back at data which someone has attempted to "scrub" from public view, we can fully anticipate Google (et al) to enhance their custom date-range filtering tools, to more effectively filter out crap