Have you ever thought about your data’s afterlife? The digital footprints that we leave behind after our demise are so extensive that our identities can persist beyond our mortal existence.
The advent of AI has enabled the possibility to interact with departed loved ones. A young man is still able to compete with his father in an old Xbox racing game, utilizing his father’s saved games. The ‘digital afterlife industry’ provides a posthumous delivery of video, audio, and written messages. The use of AI enables the replication of language patterns and personality traits through the analysis of extensive personal data.
In The Afterlife of Data. What Happens to Your Information When You Die and Why You Should Care, Carl Öhman, an assistant professor at Uppsala University, addresses the issue of data ownership and the decision-making process regarding the fate of our digital assets after our demise. Who assumes control will effectively control future access to this digital past. This information (or substantial portions thereof) will persist, barring the dissolution of Meta (Facebook) and Alphabet (Google) or a conflict that results in the destruction of the data centres used to store these data.
The afterlife of data raises a multitude of ethical, economic, and legal inquiries that are currently unaddressed. The concept of a legal right to privacy does not extend to the deceased. Secrets that were previously thought to be confined to the grave can, in some cases, have a detrimental impact on the reputation of the deceased. In theory, individuals have the option to delete their data, at least any materials they do not wish to be accessible to the general public. Data, however, will endure. Some parents have attempted to access and process the data of their deceased child, but have been unsuccessful. The courts have determined that it is not within their purview to make such decisions, leaving it to the platform’s owners. Neither the EU nor the US has legislation in place governing post-mortem privacy.
The data is held by many organizations, the majority of which are unknown. Most are unwilling to delete these data. Öhman expresses concerns that profit-driven businesses may lack the reliability required to act as guardians of digital heritage. He questions whether governments or NGOs would be more suitable curators, but is unsure and cites George Orwell’s observation that ‘who controls the past, controls the future.’ However, these data could also prove beneficial to historians, policymakers, and society at large. Roy Rosenzweig observed that the data provide researchers with an ‘essentially complete historical record’.
The implications of all of this are significant and warrant further reflection. ‘The Afterlife of Data’ is an insightful book that offers a compelling perspective on the potential implications of data in the afterlife. It is highly recommended reading for those interested in this topic.
Published in a LinkedIn post, december 2024.
