Science and Society

Assuming one dies and your family desires to know about your e-mails and personal online accounts (online life), it'd be easier to include in the online agreement for emails and any electronic websites in which people put personal information, whether or not they would like to share this in the event of their death, given of course that the person(s) seeking the information are family members and only after a period of 90 days have passed since one's death. This would avoid legal costs and unnecessary court battles. Just a thought.

I can understand the argument Yahoo! presented though. The people with whom he corresponded deserve equal privacy. I think if the documents were ever released, unless in the case of a murder trial, the names should be removed as well as the email addresses of the people with whom he corresponded

As another pointed out, e-mail is not a private reflection of one's state of mind, but a communication between at least two people. The other people deserve their privacy and avoiding any misunderstandings. I understand why a family, seeking answers as to why their loved one committed suicide, or to be closer to them in the event they have died by other means, but the dead loved one is not the only person whose privacy is at stake.

And while I like the idea of having a 'family members may access this account if I'm dead' clause, in a practical sense, that's not a great idea. What happens if an e-mail is sent to or received by someone who does NOT want anyone else to read it? It's impractical to maintain two levels of e-mail access security. Sad as it is for families looking for answers, strict e-mail privacy protects others beyond the loved ones who leave so little to understand behind.

If it was a handwritten diary that was inadvertently left at the house of the "computer person with the most knowledge," would he have given them the diary? Privacy is privacy, whether handwritten or computer generated, and should be respected on either side of the grave.

I think email is private but let's face it, if you don't want ANY personal information getting into the wrong hands don't put it on your computer. No matter how well you hide it, it's retrievable. If the person were under-age than I think their parents have the right to see the emails, otherwise no but it's not like the dead person is going to sue or anything.

No I don't think anyone should have a right to anyone else's e-mail before or after death , for any reason. Sad as this case is if he wanted them to know anything at all he would have made arrangements for to let them know

No I don't think anyone should have a right to anyone else's e-mail before or after death , for any reason. Sad as this case is if he wanted them to know anything at all he would have made arrangements for to let them know

If this were a stack of letters, would the person that wrote them expect the same privacy? No. Once a letter is sent (electronic or otherwise), it becomes the property of the person that received it. In the event of someone's death, the family has an equivalent right to view that information and or property. Privacy is not an absolute by any means. And remember, it is a "reasonable" expectation of privacy. If you want more privacy, don't sign whatever it is and get a "dummy" email account then no one knows who it is from.

My younger brother committed suicide without leaving any notes or explanations behind. There are not enough words to describe the pain that we felt that day - and which continues to this one.

This is a tough issue, but I wouldn't recommend giving access to other people's emails, unless they've given prior consent for release (like Enrico suggested). I would add though that circumstances are different in each case, so that should be weighed as well. For instance, a person murdered in cold blood in quite different than that of a suicide victim - and evidence could be there that would link it to the murderer.

When my first husband passed away almost 7 years ago I had to go thru his personal belongings and discovered things I never knew about him--even after 12 years of marriage. I was unable to crack his email accounts at the time and looking back--I'm glad I didn't! In my grief I wanted to remember who my husband was and only found more pain!! Sometimes it's best to leave well enough alone and respect the privacy of the departed--no matter how hard that may seem!! The only reason I can see hacking into the deceased's email's if it will help solve a capital crime (presumidly the deceased cause of demise and who may have done it, ect.).

The way to live your life with regards to personal documentation is to accept that there is no privacy. Be careful what you write or record. Always think, "would I want this published in the Newspaper or on the Net?"

Katmndieux - Actually when you sign up for email access from any email provider you are signing up for privacy that is guarenteed from that provider. When you send a letter through the mail you don't sign a clause at the post office saying they will hide your letter from public no matter what. But if your letter were opened before arriving at its destination then that is a federal offense, so there is some privacy there. The difference is that once email is sent to someone else's email account there is a standard of privacy still standing. Technology has made the legal realm quite interesting to navigate to say the least.

Dear Mr. Potter:
I am actually responding to your article on earthquakes.
I did submit some information to the general input mailbox.
The article, at least on the Front Page, was headed:
Earth Any Shakier Than Usual?
- while the article did not directly address this.
I can tell you that the answer is: YES.
This is a linear and directional progression we are seeing.
I have found it repeating again and again, virtually every time I look at quake data.
If one looks at quakes in a location over a number of decades, one sees a clear linear progression with time, and increased frequency of quakes, such as those of Mag 4 and greater.
Most recently I gathered data at USGS on the North ATlantic Ridge. When this area has large quakes, mainland USA quakes occur. There are trigger points of quakes, which are followed by more elsewhere.
For the area of Atlantic Ridge, east of the USA, I found the quakes, < or = 4, have progressed steadily.
There are better ways to show the data, but here is a simple description.
In the 1970's, there were an average of around 10 such quakes a year.
In the 1980's, there were 112 such quakes. In the 1990's there were 156. In the years 2000 to 2008 USGS data showed 192 quakes, for less then 8 years. which is about twice what was seen in the 1970's.
There is no basis to think that the quakes are not increasing in frequency and magnitude.
I have one question: Why is it that USGS did not report [at all] 2 fat quakes just east of the continent on the Atlantic Ridge, while they were posted on the EMSC [Mediterranean] site?
These, part of a 3 quake Atlantic Ridge series, are related to the huge Illinois series, and the Nevad series, along with other ridges, such as in the Antarctic area, Sandwich Islands, and elsewhere.
The WAshington DC area one came on the heels of Atlantic Ridge activity.
The planet does not have the homeostatis people think it does.
Oh, and if you are interested in tornedos - all those in the south central US? Seems to have a relationship with the Central US earthquakes. I have repeatedy found this.
Elisheva Rubin
Cleveland Ohio

Sorry. I forgot this.
Re Illinois - The Wabash Fault in S Illinois has been "activated" and is now actively quaking. It was not before. This is a unidirectional phenomena, and will continue.
This has been reported by a number of seismo experts.

My sister and I have made a pact to be in charge of each other's email, Facebook, and MySpace accounts in case one of us dies. I don't mind having her read everything about me.