Digital Death Day: Good People

On Thursday, I had the pleasure of attending the first Digital Death Day in Mountain View, CA. For those of you keeping track, that’s a long way from NC, but the trip was well worth it. I left refueled with ideas, inspiration and connections. In this post, I’m going to cover all of the great folks I met. I also recorded podcasts with several of these folks and will share those in the next few days. You can also expect a compilation of everyone’s session notes, which I will share when they become available.

One of the unconference principles states something like “the people who come are the right people to be there.” In this case, I couldn’t agree more. We had a very diverse group: authors, researchers, technologists, funeral directors, estate planners/attorneys, and entrepreneurs. Some quick notes about the people I met…

It was a pleasure to finally meet Jeremy Toeman and his business partner Adam Burg from Legacy Locker. They’re both good guys and share a spirit of cooperation, not necessarily competition. Speaking of competition, it was good to see Nate Lustig from Entrustet again. Both Legacy Locker and Entrustet (along with DataInherit who couldn’t send a representative) were sponsors of the event.

I also met Sam Beal, founder of Sam is helping older individuals record their family stories in digital form. I was especially impressed by his telephone service that allows non-Internet users to phone in their stories. They are then preserved, like a voicemail message, for their family. The oral tradition preserved digitally—what a great idea.

Stacey Pitsillides, PhD student and creator of, joined us from London. I’ve followed her work for some months now and I was pleased to meet her. She also shared some great videos with the group and is going to lend her design talents to the group in the future.

Some professions are slow to change, and with digital death we deal with at least two of them: funeral directors and attorneys. We had both in attendance at Digital Death Day. I was pleased to meet Nathan Dosch ( and Ryan Thogmartin ( who are leading the digital charge in both of these industries. Kudos to both of them.

I also want to mention Dazza Greenwood, executive director of the eCitizen Foundation, which addresses legal and policy issues for tomorrow’s Internet systems. I’m personally excited to see a policy leader in the group and I’m sure Dazza and the Foundation will help us raise awareness and create policies for dealing with death on the Internet.

Of course, I also have to recognize Kaliya Hamlin and her team for coordinating the event. Having everyone in the same room was exactly what our community needed to move forward.

There were many others who contributed great ideas—too many to name. Thanks to everyone for the great ideas. I’ll devote a future post to the new ideas that came out of the event, but for now I’ll say that the event was an overwhelming success and I look forward to Digital Death Day 2011. (I’ve actually signed on to help coordinate the next event.) It’s an exciting time for the Digital Death community. Onward!

Be Sociable, Share!

, ,

2 Responses to Digital Death Day: Good People

  1. RBrian Burkhardt May 23, 2010 at 3:19 am #

    Thanks for posting this informative recap of the conference. As a Funeral Consumer advocate I am concerned that the funeral consumer is quickly educated on this topic.

    I could not not attend, due to the fact that I had a meeting on the Green Cremation!Looking forward to more information from you on the (un)conference.:-)

    Digital Death is important to the Future of Funerals.
    Keep up the Good work.

    Your Funeral Guy

  2. Victoria Tayler May 25, 2010 at 7:58 am #

    Thanks for the round-up of DigitalDeathDay! We are delighted that the event was such a success and hope that, in addition to sponsoring, we can make it to next year’s event and meet people from our industry face-to-face.


Leave a Reply

Read more:
Google may be more accurate at predicting when a patient is going to die than doctors and current hospital warning systems. Their ‘Medical Brain’ Team is masterfully helping Google break into the health-care sphere. They have begun training their AI system to assess the risk of death in hospital patients by reviewing 175,639 data points present in patient’s electronic medical records. Not only does their system assess current medical records (lab results, vital signs etc.) and dig up information about age, ethnicity, can also decipher and interpret buried away handwritten notes on charts or information scribbled away on PDFs. “In general, prior work has focused on a subset of features available in the EHR [Electronic Health Record], rather than on all data available in an EHR, which includes clinical free-text notes, as well as large amounts of structured and semi-structured data.” - Google’s team One major case study highlighting the (morbid) success of Google’s system involves a woman with metastatic breast cancer. 24 hours after her admission Google gave the woman a 19.9% chance of dying in the hospital, whereas the hospital’s augmented Early Warning Score estimated only a 9.3 chance. Less than two weeks later the woman passed away in the hospital. As a whole, Google has analyzed 216,221 hospitalizations and 114,003 patients - giving them over 46 billion data points from their electronic health records. While Google’s algorithm is not perfect, it appears to predict when you will die with up to 95% accuracy (as compared to roughly 85% accuracy from current hospital Early Warning Scores). Less grim than predicting death, Google’s AI can also forecast many other patient outcomes including how long people may stay in the hospital and their odds of readmission. The ability to possibly smooth out the process of entering data and improve how that data is used could cut down human error in medical care and greatly improve patient care. To read Google’s paper published in Nature, click here To read the in depth Bloomberg article on the subject, click here
Google’s AI Can Now Predict Death With 95% Accuracy

Google may be more accurate at predicting when a patient is going to die than doctors and current hospital warning...