The idea of life/death as defined in the analog world is getting complicated in this digital age. As netizens, our everyday life is immersed in diverse forms of digital acts that by and large leave a digital footprint until and unless the traces of our digital lives are erased forever through deliberate human intervention or collapse of technology. In this era of hyper-digitalization, we’re not just living our biological lives; we're also crafting algorithmic versions of ourselves, day by day, in the digital realm. "When we encounter the dead through their left-behind data - what researchers call 'digital remains' - we are not merely facing a symbolic mask but a lifetime of data, an informational corpse." We must sharpen our awareness of how we manage our digital selves to guard against the risks of data manipulation, digital theft, and breaches of privacy in the online world.
Together with being critically cautious about what we post, comment, like or share, we need to negotiate with a new set of concepts and new forms of understanding to deal with the digital imbroglio. At the outset, this new form of digital sensitisation should begin with the planning of our digital estate. This must be a priority in our lives today, as many of us now map our analog existence onto the digital world. The digital conglomerates are always in the process of calibrating our digital trails to monetise on our behaviour. Privacy, digital ethics and digital identities are at stake as we continue to immerse ourselves injudiciously into the virtual world. The paper titled 'Digital Immortality' published by Gordon and Jim Gary in 2007 speculate on the dual ways of immortality the 21st century is extending to us.
We have to develop a new culture of planning our digital inheritance to exclude as much as possible a status of 'digital intestate.' Despite the absence of 'digital will' in our legal discourses, we need to chart a plan of action regarding the posthumous usage of our digital remains including passwords, visual and literary content and even digital signature. Death in the contemporary world entails our journey from our bones to bytes. A new form of vocabulary that facilitates responsible management of digital selves is the need of the hour.
Our digital data ought be regarded as the 'technological heirloom' we bequeath to our near and dear ones. They are stories of our networked lives and can create havoc to the memories we leave behind if handled unethically. It can also be a threat to the right to privacy of the human beings we leave behind. Digital afterlife comprise the ways in which we manage the intersections of life and death with digital embodiment. We are also accountable for the necro-digital-waste that we leave behind in the forms of defunct websites and digital gadgets.
The notions of 'digital burial' as the cremation / erasure of the digital residues left behind by an individual, 'digital inheritance' to focus on the digital memories and artefacts we handover to our kith and kin, 'right to digital privacy' posthumously and 'right to forgetfulness' are the new age concerns that require intense debates and deliberations.
Fascinating developments are emerging at the crossroads of death and digital data. A new corporate trend, the digital afterlife industry, is capitalizing on the management of our digital legacies after death. Carla Sofka has coined the term thanatechnology to describe this phenomenon, referring to "any kind of technology that can be used to deal with death, dying, grief, loss, and illness." This industry is monetizing the management of techno-affective archives left behind by the deceased, transforming how we navigate the intersection of mortality and technology.
It's up to us to craft a 'digital afterlife plan,' just as we do with legal and financial arrangements, to ensure that our loved ones can navigate life smoothly when we're no longer here.
No comments:
Post a Comment