Should we build memorials for people on the internet

Cremlian

So as it is the 13th of November, a day that in my life has great meaning (12 years ago) a mentor and my best friend at the time both died in a car accident. Both were responsible for much of my critical thinking skills and fostering my love for science...Anyhow, this lead me to think a bit about the internet and death. Shouldn't we move to memorialize people on the internet and stop using physical space to bury the dead? A quick search found a few sites that seem to set up memorial websites but I doubt this is wide spread. I barely know anything about my great grandfather but if my information is stored appropriately it will be trival for my great great grandchildren to retain much of the information of my life. Should we have a Wikipedia of the dead?

HungryJoe

I guess that would be okay if you don't mind punk kids hacking your memorial, or your memorial crashing, or your provider going out of business like Geocities, or programming language evolving to the point that no one can read the code for your memorial.

IMHO, the internet is great for ephemeral things like this forum. This forum is terrifically entertaining right now, but I don't think anyone besides Scrym seriously thinks it will still be here even as little as ten years from now. If you don't have any problem with a memorial with a lifespan of about five to ten years or so, put one on the internet. If you want a memorial to actually last, you might want to think about devoting some physical space to it.

Apreche

If you want a memorial to actually last, you might want to think about devoting some physical space to it.

Ah, but if it is in a physical place, so few people will see it.

Look, ye mighty.

Cremlian

IMHO, the internet is great for ephemeral things like this forum. This forum is terrifically entertaining right now, but I don't think anyone besides Scrym seriously thinks it will still be here even as little as ten years from now. If you don't have any problem with a memorial with a lifespan of about five to ten years or so, put one on the internet. If you want a memorial to actually last, you might want to think about devoting some physical space to it.

It would be trivial to create some sort of government entity or foundation who could maintain something more lasting. I mean if you think about it many a monument has been lost to time or disaster as well. And if it's part of a foundation or government agency they can insure that the site keeps getting updated with newer technology so it does not obsolete it's self.

Viga

There is a site where people put up obituaries and such for the dead. I came across it when a girl in the goth scene here died. It's not a very good site but it does the job.

So as it is the 13th of November, a day that in my life has great meaning

Mine too.

Also, if the person was someone who got online a lot or was apart of online communities then yeah a website in their memory would be great. But if the person never did that or much less touched a computer what's the point.

HungryJoe

It would be trivial to create some sort of government entity or foundation who could maintain something more lasting.

You guys think too many things are trivial. Have you ever created "some sort of government entity or foundation"? Exactly how much experience do you have creating "some sort of government entity or foundation"? Do you have the money to fund a foundation? One of the nice things about a physical monument is that it's pretty much self sustaining. Buy it with a one-time cash outlay, and it will last years before any maintenance required, and when such maintenance is required, it can usually be performed by anyone. Meanwhile, your foundation is going to need constant money (probably from a trust. Do you have enough money to establish a trust fund to keep a foundation going?) in order to provide much more frequent maintenance.

If you want a memorial to actually last, you might want to think about devoting some physical space to it.

Ah, but if it is in a physical place, so few people will see it.

So . . . would you rather have few people see it over a long term or many people see it over a short term? If you're the one building the memorial, it's up to you. I'd rather have one that lasts.

I mean if you think about it many a monument has been lost to time or disaster as well.

Of course, nothing is permanent in this world, but as between a physical monument and an internet monument, I'll bet on the physical monument outlasting the internet one everytime, even taking into account natural disaster.

Go to any graveyard in New Hampsire. You'll see readable headstones dating back to the 1700s. Do you seriously expect anything on the internet to last that long?

The internet is not the answer to everything. Some things will always be done better in the real world. Monuments are one of those things.

Cremlian

You guys think too many things are trivial. Have you ever created "some sort of government entity or foundation"? Exactly how much experience do you have creating "some sort of government entity or foundation"?

Actually yes, I am helping form a non-profit.

I think you don't understand when I say trivial, I mean on a technological level.

HungryJoe

You guys think too many things are trivial. Have you ever created "some sort of government entity or foundation"? Exactly how much experience do you have creating "some sort of government entity or foundation"?

Actually yes, I am helping form a non-profit :-p

Has it been trivial? If it's so trivial, why are you in the process of helping to form it? Why isn't it already done? How are you going to fund this non-profit? How long do you expect this non-profit to last?

I think you don't understand when I say trivial, I mean on a technological level.

That's not what you said. You said, "It would be trivial to create some sort of government entity or foundation who could maintain something more lasting." That in no way impies that you meant it on a technological level. If that's what you mean to say, then say it.

But let's explore that. How do you know that technological maintenance would be trivial. It apparently wasn't so trivial to Geocities. If you answer, "But I'm more awesome than Geocities.", I'll have to rejoin that I'll bet at the inception of Geocitiies, there were some people there who thought they were pretty awesome as well, and that what they were building would last forever.

Apreche

Ok, I got the answer here, I was thinking too narrowly about the problem space.

First off, what is the purpose of a memorial? It's not for the dead, it's for the living. A stone with a name and a year on it may last a very long time, but is it still serving its purpose? Does anyone actually have any memory to go with those names? Is any of the meaning retained whatsoever? Does anyone care? No, the rock itself becomes more meaningful than the person it memorializes as the stone becomes a historical artifact. The exception, of course, is when the represented person was very famous.

Also, whether you make a physical monument or a web site doesn't really matter. They will only last as long as they are tended to by people who care. Those graves in NH are only there because someone is tending to the cemetery. Just as a web site will only last as long as someone actively tends to it. And I really see no problem with that. The memorial is there for the living people who care. If there are no more living people who care to tend to it, then it has outlived its usefulness, and it's fine for it to go away.

Thus, the key to making a memorial that will last and continue to have meaning for a long time is not a matter of making something digital vs. something physical. The key is to increase the number of people who care, and increasing the amount that they care. How do you do this? I've got one easy answer, though I'm sure there are others.

Instead of memorializing with a web site, stone, or something else static, memorialize someone in art. Make a movie, write a book, make a video game, or even a painting. The Mona Lisa has a fuck ton of staying power than any grave stone. Make an awesome piece of artwork that humans will continue to care about far into the future, and then dedicate that work to those you wish to memorialize. Better yet, make the piece of art about those people, and their story will survive along with their name. For example, if there is a very famous painting of your mother, people will be asking and researching who she is centuries from now.

HungryJoe

Ok, I got the answer here, I was thinking too narrowly about the problem space.

First off, what is the purpose of a memorial? It's not for the dead, it's for the living. A stone with a name and a year on it may last a very long time, but is it still serving its purpose? Does anyone actually have any memory to go with those names? Is any of the meaning retained whatsoever? Does anyone care? No, the rock itself becomes more meaningful than the person it memorializes as the stone becomes a historical artifact. The exception, of course, is when the represented person was very famous.

So, your answer is to be very famous?

Damn Mom, you forgot to be very famous.

Instead of memorializing with a web site, stone, or something else static, memorialize someone in art. Make a movie, write a book, make a video game, or even a painting. The Mona Lisa has a fuck ton of staying power than any grave stone. Make an awesome piece of artwork that humans will continue to care about far into the future, and then dedicate that work to those you wish to memorialize. Better yet, make the piece of art about those people, and their story will survive along with their name. For example, if there is a very famous painting of your mother, people will be asking and researching who she is centuries from now.

So, another answer is to make a very famous piece of art? You probably think that's "trivial", don't you? How many very famous pieces of art have you made lately? How many very famous pieces of art have been made by any of the people who read this forum?

Most people are not artists. Most people do not ahve the talent to make a famous piece of art on their own, nor do they have the money to pay for a famous piece of art to be made.

Most people also don't have enough money to establish a foundation that will maintain a website far into the future. Most people, however, do have enough money to buy a modest stone that might require some cleaning every twenty years or so.

Try again.

Cremlian

That's not what you said. You said, "It would be trivial to create some sort of government entity or foundation who could maintain something more lasting." That in no way impies that you meant it on a technological level. If that's what you mean to say, then say it.

But let's explore that. How do you know that technological maintenance would be trivial. It apparently wasn't so trivial to Geocities. If you answer, "But I'm more awesome than Geocities.", I'll have to rejoin that I'll bet at the inception of Geocitiies, there were some people there who thought they were pretty awesome as well, and that what they were building would last forever.

I'm at work right now and a bit busy to get into a long back and forth, but are you going to argue that it would be difficult to acquire funding to create internet memorials or databases on people to be remembered. When we already spend tons of money one what color the inside of a casket is and how fuffy the inside material is?

Geocities is different in a couple ways, the main way it was different was in it was part of a profit seeking corporation. (and was pretty much abandoned years ago)

Scott's point is crazy.

HungryJoe

I'm at work right now and a bit busy to get into a long back and forth, but are you going to argue that it would be difficult to acquire funding to create internet memorials or databases on people to be remembered. When we already spend tons of money one what color the inside of a casket is and how fuffy the inside material is?

How much money do you actually think you're talking about there?

Think of it this way. Divide a piece of paper into two columns. In Column A write down the "tons of money spent on what color the inside of a casket is and how fluffy the inside material is" and in Column B write down how much money would be required to establish a foundation that would maintain an internet site in perpetuity, taking into account the operating costs of the foundation, the salaries of the people employed to maintain the foundation itself, and the salaries of the people who do the actual computer work maintaining your site. I'll bet that the figure in Column B is much, much greater than Column A.

Geocities is different in a couple ways, the main way it was different was in it was part of a profit seeking corporation. (and was pretty much abandoned years ago)

What difference does it make that Geocitiies was run for profit? Do non-profits always last longer than for-profit enterprises? Is that your argument? Your point about Geo being abandoned years ago is exactly what I expect will happen to any internet memorial for a non-famous person. It will be abandoned a short time after its establishment.

Scott's point is crazy.

What? Haven't you made any very famous pieces of art lately?

Well, at least we can agree on Scott's point being crazy. If nothing else, this thread has given me a happy because of that. Perhaps this thread will last forever as a memorial to a time when I was happy thinking of Scott's latest crazy point.

Apreche

Most people also don't have enough money to establish a foundation that will maintain a website far into the future. Most people, however, do have enough money to buy a modest stone that might require some cleaning every twenty years or so.

That nobody will ever look at or care about after you are gone.

Another solution is to make babies. If your family continues for generations, odds are at least a few of those people may take an interest in their heritage. This strategy works well in conjunction with photography and such.

While I'm on it, there is one other strategy. Let's say you don't care if other people remember this person. The memorial is strictly for you, and you don't really care if it outlives you or not. In this case, a very good idea is to create a small memorial or shrine in your house. I know this is common in many cultures, and with good reason. You personally will remember someone a lot more if you see a memorial to them every single day than if you visit the cemetery once in a blue moon. You can bring this solution into the 21st century by creating a web page for them, and setting it as your home page.

HungryJoe

Most people also don't have enough money to establish a foundation that will maintain a website far into the future. Most people, however, do have enough money to buy a modest stone that might require some cleaning every twenty years or so.

That nobody will ever look at or care about after you are gone.

Except your family, including your kids and your grandkids.

Not everyone is as cold and uncaring as you seem to think people should be. Some of us actually care about family members and other people we have known that have passed on before us and, because of those feelings of care, actually visit cemetaries and gravesites in order to remember them, whether they were very famous or not.

You personally will remember someone a lot more if you see a memorial to them every single day than if you visit the cemetery once in a blue moon. You can bring this solution into the 21st century by creating a web page for them, and setting it as your home page.

You can do that if you want, but not every aspect of human life can be or needs to be brought into the 21st century by creating a web page for it. The internet is not the solution for everything.

Also, does anyone want to see a memorial for the dead everytime they log on to the internet? The point of a memorial is not to see it every single day, but to see it when you want to see it. If you want to see a memorial to a dead person every single day, that's fine I guess, but, in my opinion, it would be a little morbid even for me.

gomidog

I visit my grandmother's stone which is in the cemetery across the street from my house. Twice a year we clean it and plant fresh flowers. It's not for her - by doing that, we remember. You can also make other kinds of memorials, like a photo album or a website, but a small stone with their name carved on it could be found by future generations. It's like saying "These bones had a name and a life." to archeologists from the future.

Apreche

You can do that if you want, but not every aspect of human life can be or needs to be brought into the 21st century by creating a web page for it. The internet is not the solution for everything.

If nothing else, a web page, urn, photograph, etc. can serve the same memorial purpose as a grave stone, but it is far far less wasteful.

Cemeteries are a tremendous waste of resources, especially land and money. Burying the dead in extremely ornate fancy boxes in such a way that they will not rot back into the earth is so tremendously wasteful. It is a case of stupid tradition butting heads with practicality. Even a simple video tape of the person in question serves as a far better memorial with drastically less expense.

HungryJoe

Burying the dead in extremely ornate fancy boxes in such a way that they will not rot back into the earth is so tremendously wasteful. It is a case of stupid tradition butting heads with practicality.

If this is one of those "everyone should live like Scott" thing, you fail. People will always be buried. People find solace in funerals and the burial process and they want to have a place that they can visit and remember the people they have lost. It's nice to see how you so happily use the argument that "the overwhelming majority of people" want X to be banned when you agree with the majority, but call the majority stupid when you don't.

Cremlian

If this is one of those "everyone should live like Scott" thing, you fail. People will always be buried. People find solace in funerals and the burial process and they want to have a place that they can visit and remember the people they have lost. It's nice to see how you so happily use the argument that "the overwhelming majority of people" want X to be banned when you agree with the majority, but call the majority stupid when you don't.

Not to change the conversation from the topic too much.

But burial customs are not set in stone.... We no longer build pyramids for our leaders or insist that the wife be killed and buried with her husband. There is nothing wrong with attempting to change a custom of society (just don't be surprised when it fails or takes several hundred years). Joe, your really in Old Man mode today...

Kate Monster

I personally dislike burials (not only do I find that they focus the attention of the mourners on an odd kind of body worship, cost far more than the grieving should have to take on, are a big production that is stressful for the mourners - not usually restorative, but they also -in my experience- take place far too soon after a person passes to provide any true comfort) and can't stand that cemeteries take up living people's space and resources. As such, I won't have one and I advocate people educating themselves in other methods of memorializing someone and easing the grieving process. However, if people do take comfort in it or just want it because it is what is done, they have every right to be buried.
Logistically, what happens three of four generations out and burial plot and headstones no longer have visitors? Other than for a vague historical significance, why not reuse that spot for another person if there is no family objection? At least this will keep costs and space usage down.

Wyatt

I've considered the idea of being cremated, having some of my ashes mixed with metal and forged into a sword. I'd consider this to be a rather practical memorial and kind of bad ass. This way future generations can gaze upon the glistening blade and say "I wonder. How much this thing will sell for on eBay?"

Cremlian

I've considered the idea of being cremated, having some of my ashes mixed with metal and forged into a sword. I'd consider this to be a rather practical memorial and kind of bad ass. This way future generations can gaze upon the glistening blade and say "I wonder. How much this thing will sell for on eBay?"

I always wanted to do that and inscribe it with some sort of stupid "Pull this sword when all hope is lost" or something like that...

HungryJoe

Logistically, what happens three of four generations out and burial plot and headstones no longer have visitors? Other than for a vague historical significance, why not reuse that spot for another person if there is no family objection?

This actually used to be done. Take the cemetery scene in Hamlet, for example. The gravedigger digs up lots of other people's bones when he's digging Ophelia's grave because space was limited and they kept using the same general space. The above-ground crypts in New Orleans would periodically be cleaned of bones so that new people could be placed in them.

But burial customs are not set in stone.... We no longer build pyramids for our leaders or insist that the wife be killed and buried with her husband.

What happened to the common people in the pyramid days? Most were buried. Customs change, but the custom of burial has been around for much, much longer than just about any other custom. I submit that, as a custom, it's pretty much set in stone . . . HA!

There is nothing wrong with attempting to change a custom of society (just don't be surprised when it fails or takes several hundred years). Joe, your really in Old Man mode today...

That's one of the problems I had with STTNG. They made a big deal of their whole society being vegetarian, but Captain Kirk and the rest of the TOS crew (except Spock) were unrepentant meat-eaters and some of them were supposedly still alive during the time of STTNG. I just can't believe that something so basic about a society as whether it's acceptable to eat meat can be changed that fast.

Apreche

Forging the ashes into the blade? Meh. How about you just forge the sword in the fires of your burning corpse. Burning corpses are really really really hot. I bet it would be hot enough to heat up the steel for some hammering.

Also, organ donation and scientific research is good way to go. Set the leftovers on fire.

HungryJoe

I still think Scott's body should be included in Gunther von Hagen's Body Worlds Exhibit doing something he never did in life, like this:

Apreche

I still think Scott's body should be included in Gunther von Hagen's Body Worlds Exhibit doing something he never did in life, like this:

Being in an exhibit isn't really any different than say, Lenin's tomb. Not really the kind of non-wasteful body disposal I'm looking for.

gomidog

You know what? I'm going to give any useful bits away after I die, and afterward hope I am cremated. I always thought it would be cool to have descendants and people dear to me have an assignment where they take some of the money I leave them and go to a place I held dear. Like "you go to Tokyo, you go to Lake Louise" etc. That way, my dear people can have new adventures and memories associated with leaving the traces of me in the places I loved.

Wyatt

I still think Scott's body should be included in Gunther von Hagen's Body Worlds Exhibit doing something he never did in life, like this:

Isn't Hagen's working on a exhibit to display sexual acts?

Donating your body to science is a good option.

@Emily: It's like a global scavenger hunt. I dig it. "Go to Paris and find the park in this picture..."
@Scott: People don't burn well. The fire needed to dispose of a corpse is so hot because we're a lot of water.

Apreche

@Scott: People don't burn well. The fire needed to dispose of a corpse is so hot because we're a lot of water.

Sooo, hot enough for forging?

Fantasy story idea: A kingdom where upon coronation the new king reforges the king's sword in the fires of the previous kings burning body. The souls of a thousand dead kings inhabit the blade of destiny, etc., etc.

HungryJoe

I still think Scott's body should be included in Gunther von Hagen's Body Worlds Exhibit doing something he never did in life, like this:

Isn't Hagen's working on a exhibit to display sexual acts?

LOL. That might be the only chance Scott will ever have to engage in sexual congress.

You need burial and wind-swept gravesides to be able to have cool things like this:

The Unquiet Grave (Traditional Ballad c. 1400)

The wind doth howl today m'love
And a winter's worth of rain
I never had but one true love
In the cold grave she was lain

Oh I adored my sweetest love
As any young man may
So I'll sit and weep upon her grave
For twelve-month and a day

The twelve-month and a day foregone
The dead began to speak
"Oh who sits weeping on my grave
And will not let me sleep?"

"'Tis I, m'love, upon thy grave
Who will not let you sleep
For I crave one kiss of your cold, clay lips
And that is all I seek"

"You crave one kiss of my cold, clay lips
But I am one year gone.
If you have one kiss of my cold, clay lips
Your time will not be long
Let me remind thee, dearest one
A patient heart to keep
For we professed eternal love
That lives though I may sleep"

There down in yonder garden grove
Love, where we once did walk
The finest flower that ever was seen
Has withered to a stalk
The stalk is withered dry, my love
Though our hearts shan't decay
So make yourself content, my love
Till god calls you away."

Wyatt

You need burial and wind-swept gravesides to be able to have cool things like this:

Also for Goth kids to smoke cloves and take pictures for their MySpace...

GreatTeacherMacRoss

Couldn't one consider a person's contributions to the internet as their monument? From the moment you created something to the moment you stop interacting with the web forever, aren't you constantly creating a sort of 'life's work', and in turn your own memorial? Could a memorial website not simply be an archived collection of all a person's contributions to the internet as well as in life?

@Scott: People don't burn well. The fire needed to dispose of a corpse is so hot because we're a lot of water.

Sooo, hot enough for forging?

Fantasy story idea: A kingdom where upon coronation the new king reforges the king's sword in the fires of the previous kings burning body. The souls of a thousand dead kings inhabit the blade of destiny, etc., etc.

I like that sword idea!