Future Genealogy in the 2100s

Coolnabacky1873 · 09-01-2015 5:47pm #1

So, I throw around ideas from time to time about how genealogy will look in the future and, if you’re interested in such a thing, I’d love to hear what others think it will be like in 2102 as people excitedly wait for the release of the 2002 census that they can access via the holographic mini-projectors implanted in their forehead :pac:

POSITIVES
Records Access
There is a good chance that every census, BMD cert, Church register, will, deed, tax, court, prison, etc., record will be digitized and available, subject to various types of restricted access (e.g. 100 year rule), and either free or for payment.

New Types of Records
Even if subject to a 100 year rule, the records that were created from the administration of new developments in the 20th century will be available, such as: PPS number applications, driving license applications, TV licenses, etc.

Will they be as excited about the release of other types of records such as Ryanair Passenger Lists, 1990-2050 and M50 E-Flow Payment Records, 2008-2070, as we were about 1901 and 1911?

NEGATIVES
Declining Interaction With Churches
The trend in Ireland seems to be that people under 40 are interacting less and less with their respective Churches. Will future genealogists curse their al-a-carte Catholic ancestors of the 2020s? “They didn’t get married in a Church and didn’t bother baptize the kids, the lazy feckers”. :rolleyes:

More people are also deciding to be cremated, meaning they might not have a headstone.

Lack of Wars
In the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, hundreds of thousands of Irishmen fought in wars all over the world for different countries. Overall, the number of large wars involving English speaking countries and their armies has declined since WWII. By 2102 Ireland will also have been an independent country, with a small military and a neutrality stance for a long time. All this means there will be significantly less Irish people joined militaries, and therefore no records to consult.

The Thrill of the Hunt
Will it be too easy for our descendants that they won’t bother with genealogy at all? People today often spend their whole lives searching for information and are over-joyed with finding a new records after searching for years. If, in 2102, they can access most or all of our info by clicking a few buttons then where’s the fun it that?

BOTH
Social Media
Currently, we love when we find out an ancestors had a brush with the law or was in a newspaper because that means more information about them and possibly more records to consult. With all the stuff we put on social media now, can you image the amount of information about us that our descendants will have to wade though. They will know us in a way that we can only dream now about knowing our ancestors from the 19th century.

But, will it be too much information? How could you possibly construct a tree with associated documents and information with the sheer weight of info they will have about us, and will they think we were too self-engrossed and narcissistic for posting all those pictures of food, babies, and holidays?

Will companies such as FB and Twitter even exist in 2102? Plenty of large corporation have gone to the wall before. If they do go out of business what will happen to all the information they have accumulated from us over the years? Could they be converted to public records and stored on servers in National Archives’?

P.S. It's a slow day in work

pinkypinky · 09-01-2015 5:49pm

I have lots of things to say on this fascinating subject but am in a rush now.

However: having recently had to deal with a cremation

- there is a certificate given and Glasnevin have it in their files, so presumably there will be a corresponding record on the site.

Waitsian · 09-01-2015 5:57pm

Coolnabacky1873 wrote: »

So, I throw around ideas from time to time about how genealogy will look in the future and, if you’re interested in such a thing, I’d love to hear what others think it will be like in 2102...

I haven't time to respond to this now (I have a Maple Leafs GM press conference to watch live) but it's something I've thought about myself. Very enjoyable read there Coolnabacky, plenty of points to ponder. I will respond anon.

Jellybaby1 · 09-01-2015 6:06pm

Thanks for posting this Cool, I was thinking along these lines just recently as I posted the family tree to the younger generation for Christmas. I just thought I had done all the hard work for them, faced all the frustrations on their behalf but enjoyed every minute of it, and I look forward to more frustrations and fun in the years to come. In the 2100's they will probably just press a button, enter a PPS number, and the whole shamoggan will appear before their very eyes!

I feel sorry for them!

Hermy · 09-01-2015 10:03pm

Coolnabacky1873 wrote: »

So, I throw around ideas from time to time about how genealogy will look in the future and, if you’re interested in such a thing, I’d love to hear what others think it will be like in 2102 as people excitedly wait for the release of the 2002 census that they can access via the holographic mini-projectors implanted in their forehead :pac:

Great thread idea Coolnabacky.

Declining Interaction With Churches

Definitely not a negative. Civil records have already replaced church records as the primary record of births, marriages and deaths and I would be hopeful that the role of 'the church' in state affairs will have ended along with it's special place in the constitution well before 2100.

Lack of Wars

Again, not a negative in my view. Although I would disagree that there is a lack of wars around the world, thankfully Ireland isn't directly involved in any of them at present and there are plenty of other activities to keep Paddy busy that generate records without having to send him to the slaughter of the trenches.

The Thrill of the Hunt

Perhaps the thrill of the hunt won't be about working backwards in time as that will already have been done to death and instead people will be more interested in working laterally. Imagine 100 years from now all the on-line trees have been linked up and you'll be able to find out your relationship to anyone else on the planet at the touch of a button!

Social Media

Given that this is the Information Age I do wonder what's next.
Will the Paul Gorry's of the 22nd century be arguing over the rights and wrongs of access to the Facebook pages or the Gmail accounts of deceased users?
Will privacy laws have caught up with technology?
And will Joe Public have fallen out of love with technology making life difficult for prying eyes trying to gather information on distant living relatives from social media websites? (I hope not!:o)

hblock21 · 09-01-2015 10:37pm

Hermy wrote: »

Perhaps the thrill of the hunt won't be about working backwards in time as that will already have been done to death and instead people will be more interested in working laterally. Imagine 100 years from now all the on-line trees have been linked up and you'll be able to find out your relationship to anyone else on the planet at the touch of a button!

Already available in Iceland!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/icelandic-antiincest-app-aims-to-stop-families-getting-too-close-8578404.html

chughes · 10-01-2015 9:56am

I think the PPS number will be hugely significant in searches in 100 years time. Just imagine if you could identify one Seamus Murphy from many others of the same name in the same locality and roughly the same age from the records 100 years ago. This will be a major benefit to future genealogists when searching for specific people.

KildareFan · 10-01-2015 11:42am

Good to think about future genealogical needs....

Schools are collecting data on pupils including PPS numbers - there are concerns about retaining the data, for data protection purposes. Imagine what would have happened to so many of our records in the past if data protection legislation had been in force.

see http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/minister-for-education-willing-to-examine-30-year-retention-of-pupil-data-1.2059149

pinkypinky · 11-01-2015 6:41pm

The declining role of the churches won't be a problem (I personally think it's a good thing) - civil certificates are entrenched enough now that I would imagine virtually no birth, death or marriage goes unregistered. Marriages have mothers names on them now, which is a primary reason to check church records in the 19th century. Dates of birth are routinely included on them and death certs, along with place of birth and parents names.

lottpaul · 11-01-2015 7:52pm

pinkypinky wrote: »

The declining role of the churches won't be a problem

You could be right. A few weeks ago I met a neighbour who was trying to get baptismal certs for her grandchildren - due to start school in Sept 2015 and Sept 2016 - only to find they had never been registered by the previous priest in her parish!! So much for modern standards of record keeping.

I've also noticed that deaths registered in some of the Kerry burial books - available online - are very inaccurate. Ages, religion, marital status are often wrong (if there at all), names are abbreviated and causes of death are often speculative. There are honourable exceptions where the books were meticulously kept but I'd hate anyone in 2115 to view them all as trustworthy historical records.

mickmackey1 · 13-01-2015 5:35pm

Hermy wrote: »

Definitely not a negative. Civil records have already replaced church records as the primary record of births, marriages and deaths and I would be hopeful that the role of 'the church' in state affairs will have ended along with it's special place in the constitution well before 2100.

Hopefully the state control of the church will also have ended, in fact hopefully all those sheep currently submitting to 'the state' will have got sense long before 2100.

Hermy · 13-01-2015 6:59pm

mickmackey1 wrote: »

Hopefully the state control of the church will also have ended, in fact hopefully all those sheep currently submitting to 'the state' will have got sense long before 2100.

I didn't know the state was in control of the church.

Waitsian · 13-01-2015 8:12pm

Hermy wrote: »

I didn't know the state was in control of the church.

Could he have meant it the other way round - church control of the state? <shrugs>

Waitsian · 05-02-2015 11:45pm

I never did answer this at length. Apologies. I've often thought about people 100 or 200 years from now researching me when I'm dust in the ground! What will they discover? Will my Facebook info be archived somewhere? Will they be able to access my email accounts? After all, don't we read love letters of people long dead that were very private at the time? Do I want them reading this stuff? I suppose it doesn't really matter - I'll not be here to care, nor will anyone who knew me. I do know there will be a headstone even though I have left instruction to be cremated. My father is buried in Canada but my brother's headstone has Dad's details on it, as in 'in memory of <AN Other>, buried in <place> who passed away in <19XX>. I'll ask someone to do the same for my details on that headstone. Mum will in there too. I laugh at them looking for my wife (never had one, never will marry) and children (43, no kids, had the snip)

Does anyone else wonder what future genealogists will discover about you?

To answer your points:

I reckon the records access will be fantastic, and I'm sure if the future's genealogists are as excitable as us lot, they'll love every new record revelation. If only we had the records we have today back in the 19th century!

As regards church records - we're fortunate I suppose that marriage was a tradition, and even more so a requirement in society in many ways. How many people today never get married, some if not most of those having children who either take the father's name, the mother's name or both! How confusing will it be searching then. Doesn't bear thinking about!

I agree about the fun aspect. If every record is available so easily, where's the thrill? It's true. I think there'll still be a minority interest in genealogy, as today, but it'll definitely be less work and much less fun.

Hermy · 06-02-2015 12:03am

mod9maple wrote: »

If only we had the records we have today back in the 19th century!

If only we had today the records we had back in the 19th century!:(

pinkypinky · 06-02-2015 10:28am

Maybe there'll be time travel in 200 years and we can get the lost 19th century records back.

Waitsian · 06-02-2015 11:12am

pinkypinky wrote: »

Maybe there'll be time travel in 200 years and we can get the lost 19th century records back.

There's a book in there.

Speaking of novels - has anyone read any genealogical fiction? Last one I read was The Blood Detective by Dan Waddell. It was very good I have to say and it's a genre I'm going to look into more. Steve Robinson's books are supposed to be good reading as well. His first of now 4 was In the Blood.

pinkypinky · 06-02-2015 12:03pm

I read Steve Robinson's first two. I liked them: similar format with split time narratives.

Rabo Karabekian · 06-02-2015 10:46pm

Coolnabacky1873 wrote: »

So, I throw around ideas from time to time about how genealogy will look in the future and, if you’re interested in such a thing, I’d love to hear what others think it will be like in 2102 as people excitedly wait for the release of the 2002 census that they can access via the holographic mini-projectors implanted in their forehead :pac:

Interesting question, but I think there's a lot of assumption that because everything is digitised means that it will be around in a 100/200/1000 years time. I don't think this will necessarily be the case, and there are a lot of articles on archiving that are bemoaning the lack of digital footprint from even 5 or 10 years ago. It's the assumption that digitisation = forever that can lead to a relaxed attitude to preservation, so I think there will still be a lot of frustration/excitement at trying to track down us in a hundred years.

CeannRua · 07-02-2015 8:25am

Rabo Karabekian wrote: »

Interesting question, but I think there's a lot of assumption that because everything is digitised means that it will be around in a 100/200/1000 years time. I don't think this will necessarily be the case, and there are a lot of articles on archiving that are bemoaning the lack of digital footprint from even 5 or 10 years ago. It's the assumption that digitisation = forever that can lead to a relaxed attitude to preservation, so I think there will still be a lot of frustration/excitement at trying to track down us in a hundred years.

^Agreed. Another thing is that some countries are questioning the need to conduct periodic censuses. Haven't read much about the topic but assume it's at least in part to do with the fact that government agencies have so many other databases or data sets about citizens.

hblock21 · 13-02-2015 2:23pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31450389

Very interesting article regarding information held on computers in the future.

"Vint Cerf, a "father of the internet", says he is worried that all the images and documents we have been saving on computers will eventually be lost.
Our life, our memories, our most cherished family photographs increasingly exist as bits of information - on our hard drives or in "the cloud". But as technology moves on, they risk being lost in the wake of an accelerating digital revolution.
"I worry a great deal about that," Mr Cerf told me. "You and I are experiencing things like this. Old formats of documents that we've created or presentations may not be readable by the latest version of the software because backwards compatibility is not always guaranteed."

Will we actually be able to open or use the documents we have on a memory stick, (a memory stick found in an old box, 100 years from now). It rings true, there are VHS home videos at home - cant use them now as we don't have a video player! So we need to convert them to CD. But in 50 years time the CD will probably have to be converted on to whatever is around then!
Even word documents sometimes don't open because the software it was created on is no longer compatible with your new system...

pinkypinky · 13-02-2015 3:12pm

As for things stored in the cloud, as a tech friend of mine likes to say "the cloud is just other people's computers".

Archives have a real problem on their hands with how to store these old format technologies. The NAI will be working on 1985 this year: conserving data on (presumably) tape drives, 3.5" floppy discs had already replaced the older larger size but both were in use....archives will have to become huge tech storage farms.

Will this eventually lead to archives saying "we don't need every iteration of everything" ?

Jellybaby1 · 13-02-2015 3:20pm

Thankfully, I have printed out every record I have saved on my computer. It takes a bit more time, more space, more work to keep track of but my trusty arch files won't let me down (I hope!!), until after I'm gone, and someone throws them all out! :eek::mad:

Waitsian · 13-02-2015 4:38pm

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

...until after I'm gone, and someone throws them all out! :eek::mad:

Donate them to a genealogical society. That's what I'll do, north and south, and in Canada too.

Jellybaby1 · 13-02-2015 5:04pm

Good idea. However, I would never have thought of asking genealogical societies for my tree. How would you ever know it was there? Also I wouldn't want some future descendant to have to pay to view either!

Future Genealogy in the 2100s

Comments