MyLifeBits meets Harry Potter - Our digital memories will remain forever!

Recently I have been looking at the multitude of implications when storing ones memory in a digital format. I have chosen to include the image of Dumbledore storing his own memories in an external pool (pensive) because I think there is an interesting parallel to be made. It always amazes me how something like the idea of a pensive, so grounded in fiction and magic can now, not only be a possibility but a reality! One can now store their memories in an external pool (computer) and even invite other people to share in some of their experiences. These 'bits' of memories, stored in their 'pools,' are shielded from the danger of natural decay in the physical world (and the human condition of forgetting.)



Microsoft's 'MyLifeBits' is probably the most complete example of a life recorded online.

" Gordon Bell has captured a lifetime's worth of articles, books, cards, CDs, letters, memos, papers, photos, pictures, presentations, home movies, videotaped lectures, and voice recordings... [in his digital pool]. He is now paperless, and is beginning to capture phone calls, IM transcripts, television, and radio. "

(http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/mylifebits/)

However my question, as always, is what is to be done with all this information once we have spent our lives accumulating it. How do we begin to edit down a lifetime's worth of information, making it relevant to both our loved ones and society? I begin to question, is this frantic gathering and saving of information a reflection on our culture's in-ability to deal with loss and mortality? Is 'digital memory,' simply a modern search for the fabled philosopher's stone (immortality) and if our information does get passed down as 'digital remains' then have we in some way achieved this goal? Nowadays we tend to keep information simply for the sake of keeping it (because we can) or because we are afraid of losing something we might need? I question whether this really is a good enough reason for it's existence?

Perfection is not Human - Allow me to Forget!

Lately I have been thinking a lot about digital sharing, what does it mean to 'share' a piece of yourself with a collective and for there to be a perfect record of each of these 'sharings'. How has this record changed the way people interact, argue, get even and even proclaim love.

By leaving behind our 'flawed' and very 'human' memory, I have begun to wonder if in the quest for immortality (of information) we are eroding our power to forget. Forgetting is something which has, throughout time, protected us both from an overload of information and our own past.

Before digital memory, if you had an argument with a friend; they would have their side, you would have your side. Eventually the fight would be forgotten. There was no proof as to who was right and who was wrong.



However if you have an argument with a friend on Skype, your words have a real chance of 'coming back' to haunt you. Your friend can now come back to you three weeks, three months or even three years later with your exact words. They can even have shown these words to various third parties and have received comments and opinions.

The appearance of this document, this non-temporal bit of evidence, means that we can no longer be spontaneous or flippant with our wording. Each word uttered in the digital realm has consequences, not just for today but forever.

"Forgetting plays a central role in human decision-making. It lets us act in time, cognizant of but not shackled by, past events. Through perfect memory we may lose a fundamental human capacity - to live and act firmly in the present"

Delete - The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age
Vicktor Mayer-Schonberger (2009)

As we inevitably live more of lives digitally and have access (digitally) to a perfect memory of both our own and other people histories. As time (and our lives) move on, there will undoubtedly be an accumulation of digital paraphernalia that we may wish to forget.

Perhaps as a designer I should begin to think about how I could program temporarily, or even decay, into digital information.

Below is an initial thought model which would allow information, which was not being regularly, used to be stored in a repository (hard disk). Information within this repository would begin to decay if not used for long periods of time. This would force the user to engage with the information they wanted to keep and not store things simply for fear of losing them. It would also mean that all information on the desktop was information that was regularly used or looked at.

Public Grief: How have things changed?

The death of Princess Diana was one of my first memories of someone very famous dying. If i'm honest I will admit to remembering more about her death, then her life itself.

Many people refer to Diana's death as being a day that will remain in the 'memory of the British public forever.'

In England grief is generally a private emotion, experienced only within a close network of friends and family who knew the person. Diana was a public figure, 'the people's princess,' this made people feel like they could share in this loss and publicly express the grief they felt. Through this shared emotion a bond was created within the British public, for a couple of days millions of people shared an experience and felt like they had a right 'to grieve'.

"Many people across the country brought [flowers] and placed them along with very personal messages written on attached cards ... A single flower with a message ... read 'Beautiful Lady, Rest in Peace, With Love, Sam (A homeless friend.)' "

The Mourning for Diana (edited by Tony Walter) 1999

Through this example we see how a huge majority of people engaged in communal grief. Public grief is a “way of rebuilding community,” through grief we feel a connection to each other and associate with each other in an emotional way.

After studying the topic of Digital Death, for around a year, the death of Michael Jackson took me by surprise. It was another example of public grief but this time flowers were not the main feature. The death Michael Jackson marked a landmark in digital culture because so much of the public grieving, remembrance and memorialization took place in a digital environment. Many people even discovered the news of his death through online sources and the reaction of the digital community was immense.

Even in somewhere as niche as my own network of Facebook friends around 70 percent of friends commented on his passing, many lamenting this loss in some way, either by donating their status as a tribute e.g. "RIP King of Pop" or perhaps by tagging their favorite song on You Tube. The internet allowed for this connection to spread quickly and visually and Michael Jackson will not only remain in the memory of the public but in their processors and networks.

The presence of the internet meant that any person could quickly and cheaply announce to the world, that they too, were sad that he is gone and that collaborative grieving was no longer focused within a specific community or even a specific nation, now people from all over the world have the opportunity to group together and feel that moment of connection (togetherness.)

An external collection of good and bad memories...

We are constantly remodeling our conceived futures,
ever get the feeling your being manipulated by your past?

Thinking about Digital Heritage... does the Digital Afterlife offor immortality?

An area which has recently come to my attention and must be considered when thinking about ‘Digital Death’ (and the potential deletion of digital data) is the relevance of that data to our historical and sociological futures.

Regarding archiving, in the non-virtual world, rubbish and buried bodies are an archaeologist’s bread and butter, so is digital information in the digital world. This information has the potential to provide a detailed account of our present digital society and culture.




Through this we begin to consider Digital Heritage, to do this we will first consider the amount and type of data typically being inputted into social networks, including photos, popular music, films etc. We question whether and where information relating to ones digital life should, or could exist, including after death (in other words what its context should be). Should it be placed in a digital museum, at a funeral or in a historical archive? We will look at methods of how one would begin to manage this mass of data once they have recorded it, and who would be responsible for the collecting, archiving, updating, and curating, of this ‘database’ of people’s social networks. This resource would allow historians, anthropologists or even family members to literally look back in time and examine a specific moment of history, pristine and in perfect clarity.