The NorthEast
Ohio Computer-Aided Genealogy Society
QUARTERLY
A Summary of Events and Topics of Interest to Online Genealogists
Vol. 12 No. 2--April 1, 2007
compiled by Luther Olson
NorthEast Ohio
Computer-Aided Genealogy [NEOCAG] serves Eastern Cuyahoga,
Lake, Geauga,
Ashtabula, Portage & Summit Counties.
Regular meetings 2nd Saturday of each month
St. Bartholomew Episcopal Church
435 S.O.M. Road, Mayfield Village, OH.
Jerry Kliot--President
CONTENTS
> News and Views
> Keeping A 2nd
PC As A Fallback Option
> What’s The
“Best” Backup?
> Everton’s
Genealogical Helper To Be Available Online as WorldVitalRecords.com
> Process Changes
for WorldConnect Databases
> Excellent
Answers Can Be Received On Rootsweb—The Bulletin Board Still Lives
> Red Flags
Raised About Concerns Over Vista's Legal Terms And Conditions
> $2 Million
Sloan Foundation Grant To Help Digitize Thousands of Books at Library
of Congress
> A New Computer
Revolution is Rising Around Us
> News and Views
I
want to especially thank the members of the NEOCAG council who have
been taking on many of the tasks required to keep our organization
running smoothly. Cynthia Turk, our immediate past President, has been
especially helpful in her efforts to keep me on track, focused on my
duties, and in taking over the microphone at our meetings when I am at
a loss for words. (Those of you that know
me will agree that is a rare occurrence.)
In addition, I’m pleased to have
the opportunity to add my comments to this edition of the QUARTERLY.
I
would like to let everyone know that NEOCAG has purchased a new display
projector for use in beaming our programs onto the large screen in the
meeting hall. I got a chance to see it in action at the March meeting
and it is much brighter and has better resolution than the projectors
we have been using.
On
a more personal note, I have retired from my position at the Cleveland
Clinic as of January 31, 2007 and I was sure that after that date I
would find myself much better able to handle the responsibilities of
President of NEOCAG. However, I was presented with an opportunity to
continue doing the kind of work that I have been doing for many years,
but this time through a consulting firm. I accepted a permanent
employment with First Consulting Group and have been placed into a full
time administrative position with a different healthcare organization.
Thus, I have even less time for non-work activities than I had before.
Don’t
misunderstand--I have no intention of giving up my elected role as
President of NEOCAG. In fact, I hope to better manage my time and allow
myself to properly prepare for both the monthly NEOCAG council meetings
and the monthly general meetings.
During
my tenure I really want to focus on all of the genealogical happenings
in the Greater Cleveland area. There are so many events coming up in
the months ahead that I can’t possibly list them all. One of my main
goals is to promote a greater synergy between the genealogical
societies, ethnic heritage societies, and Cleveland Cultural Gardens
Federation member garden societies. To that end, I have been attending
monthly meetings of the Cleveland Cultural Gardens Federation. At the
meeting this month, I had the honor to meet retired 8th District Court
of Appeals Judge Diane Karpinski, who told me about the upcoming Polish
Constitution Day Celebration.
There
will be an Ethnic Symposium on Saturday, April 28, 2007 at the Alliance
of Poles Hall, 6968 Broadway Avenue. Presenters will include Dr. John
Grabowski—Polish Emigration to Cleveland; Judge Raymond
Pianka—Genealogy and DNA Testing; and Mr. Clyde Simpson—Copernicus
Crater. More information is available from the Polish American
Congress, Ohio Division at 216.883.3131.
The
East Cuyahoga County Chapter of the Ohio Genealogical Society is
presenting a special program on Saturday, May 5, 2007. The day will
include four separate programs by Jana Sloan Broglin, CG. For more
information, contact Stacie Murry at 216-851-7768.
On
June 6, 2007 NEOCAG will be co-sponsoring an appearance by Stephen P.
Morse. Mr. Morse is the creator of the 1 Step Webpages. This web site
at http://stevemorse.org/ delivers
on the promise to make searching for our relatives online much easier
and more fruitful than it would otherwise be. Information on this
program can be obtained by going to
http://clevelandjgs.org/calendar.htm and looking for the June 6, 2007
entry.
The
annual Ohio Genealogical Society conference is in Columbus, Ohio from
April 12 – 14, 2007. Information on this wonderful program can be had
at http://www.ogs.org/2007conf.php.
The Ohio District Roundtable
calendar at http://www.rootsweb.com/~ohcdrt/
will identify many other exciting and worthwhile programs that you
should consider.
If
you belong to an ethnic heritage society and would like to expose its
members to genealogy or to the workings of the Cleveland Cultural
Gardens Federation, please tell them about my interest in bring our
groups together in meaningful ways. One way will be to come to your
ethnic community’s cultural garden along MLK Jr. Drive on May 20, 2007.
This is the day of the Rite Aid Cleveland Marathon. The runners will be
coming through the Cleveland Cultural Gardens and Rockefeller Park
between 8:00AM and noon on May 20th.
It
would be wonderful if you and other members of your heritage society
could come down to gardens and stand with other members of your ethnic
community to cheer on the marathon runners as they compete. The Rite
Aid Marathon committee has offered a cash donation to whichever
cultural garden has the best turnout for the marathon. What better way
to have your heritage society make a donation to the maintenance of
their ethnic cultural garden than simply to show up for the marathon
and help your garden to win the prize. I can be reached by phone at
216-453-0780 or by e-mail at Jerry@Kliot.net.
In
closing, I would like for you to know how proud I am to be serving as
your President and to encourage each of you to do a few things to help
NEOCAG grow. One way would be to attend our monthly council meetings
and become more involved in what we do and how we do it. Our meetings
are listed on the NEOCAG calendar page at http://neocag.net/calendar.htm.
Another
way would be to spread the word about our group and our meetings. Let
your family, friends, and acquaintances know that they are always
welcome to attend our meetings. There is something to be learned each
and every month. Bring some pastry treat to our monthly meeting. We
don’t ask people to sign up in advance, but if you have an opportunity
to bring a cake, cookies, or other snack that can be shared during our
meeting, it will help to keep bellies from rumbling during the meeting.
Offer
to serve on one of our many committees—we can always use help with
hospitality, programming, publicity, facilities, membership, and
several others. If everyone takes on a little bit of additional
responsibility, then no one person will have to shoulder the load
alone. We have an exciting future as an organization, and we can all
make a contribution.
Jerry Kliot,
President
Dear member and
friends,
The articles in this
issue of the QUARTERLY contain numerous comments from readers who are
responding to the author. In many cases
you may well find these responses more interesting and informative than
the actual article. We
are finding more and more of these “blogs” following things we read and
I feel it is great that we can hear many authoritative comments and
questions from others who are obviously knowledgeable in both computers
and genealogy.
Since this appears
to be the way our material is heading, we can probably expect to see
more of these comments in the future. In
past issues I have inserted a few with little comment—and have had
little comment in return. I would
appreciate hearing of any strong feelings, pro or con, on the subject.
…..LO
> Keeping A 2nd
PC As A Fallback Option
After
a bad experience, reader Lee Bolman is thinking about having a spare,
standby PC available: "When my 8-month-old, still-in-warranty desktop
crashed because of a bad power supply, I was reasonably well-protected
— all the data was backed up, and most data and applications were on my
laptop. But, there's stuff I don't want on the laptop in case it ever
falls into the wrong hands. So I was cut off, for example, from my
financial software.
"My
PC vendor wanted me to ship the whole system in for a warranty repair,
which meant I'd get it back in a week or two. I paid for the repair
locally and got it done in 48 hours. What would it take, I wondered, to
have a home fallover system that would be ready to jump into the breach
if my primary machine failed?
"A
little time with Google suggests that this is the issue of fallover and
'high availability.' But it's not clear that there's a reasonably
straightforward way for a home-office setup to have a backup machine
ready to go. Any ideas?"
Ideas?
You bet! First, note that you can store sensitive data on your laptop
with very little risk. Just encrypt the sensitive files and folders and
you'll make them immune to just about anything short of a
government-level supercomputer, if that!
In
any case, no matter how you encrypt the files, if you synch the laptop
data with your main PC every night, then the absolute worst-case
scenario would cost you just one day's data. A much simpler method is
to use just about any PC — even a cast-off older model no longer
capable of full-time use will do. Leave it off most of the time. It
doesn't even have to be in the same room or building as the main PC.
If
the main PC dies, but its hard drive is intact and operable, you can
remove the drive and install it in the spare PC. If the drive isn't
operable, and if you're using some form of disk imaging or whole-disk
backup on your main PC, you can restore the disk image or backup onto
the hard drive of the fallback PC. (For more information on these
backup techniques, see my Langa.com article on Fast, Easy Backups.)
Either
way — disk swap or disk image/backup transplant — Windows will complain
mightily when it boots up on the backup PC, because it will see
different hardware than before. It will immediately ask for and search
for the drivers it needs to support the spare PC. Windows will default
to generic drivers if the correct model-specific drivers aren't
available. (It will also demand re-activation within a short time.)
Moving
a hard drive may not result in a perfect duplicate of the old system.
But Windows, to its credit, will usually get itself up and running on a
spare PC — at least enough for you to be able to access your important
data while the main PC is being fixed.
Windows Secrets
Newsletter • Issue 93 • 2007-01-25
Copyright ©
1997-2005 Fred Langa/ Langa Consulting LLC. All worldwide rights
reserved.
> What’s The
“Best” Backup?
In
the next few pages, I’ll give you a ton of backup ideas and many
specific details. Some you can use as-is, but--more likely--you’ll want
to take and modify these ideas and techniques to suit your own unique
purposes and setup.
Further,
what’s “best” for you may not be what’s “best” for me, and vice versa.
Different people, different circumstances, different operating systems,
etc all need somewhat different solutions. As a result (and this is
important), this article is NOT intended to provide you with a
one-size-fits-all, cookie-cutter solution that will work for everyone,
all the time. When it comes to backups, there’s simply no such thing.
You
see, “the best backup”--- in fact, the only backup worth anything at
all--- is one that you’ll *use*.
A backup system that doesn’t fit your style of working, or that takes
too long, or is too expensive, or gives you any reason to avoid using
it, is next to worthless.
For
more on the rationale of why I do things the way I do, see the
above-referenced links, especially <http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2001/2001-12-03.htm#1>,
which explains what the main types of backups are, and what I believe
each is good for. But your needs--- and solutions--- may be different,
and that’s fine. Any backup--- any backup at all--- is better than no
backup. As long as you’re using *something* and you’re happy with it,
fine: You’re already better off than most PC users!
So
read the following, and then decide whether all, or some or none of it
will work for you; and if the answer is “none” then do a web search to
find a solution that *will* work for you. There are literally dozens---
maybe hundreds--- of backup alternatives out there: All you need to do
is find *one* that works for you. The only really bad backup is one
that’s never made. <g>
PREP WORK: MINIMIZE
UNNECESSARY JUNK
A
full backup involves moving (actually, copying) everything on your PC
to another storage medium or device. Why waste time and storage
processing junk files you don’t need?
For
example, by default, both the Recycle Bin and Internet Explorer's Cache
want to consume ridiculous amounts of your hard drive space, and these
files --- almost always junk--- will get caught up in any full backup
you do. So, to reduce the amount of junk in your backups, curb the
appetites of these space-hogs: Right click on the Recycle Bin, select
Properties, and decide how much space you want the Recycle Bin to
consume either for all drives in your system or on a per-drive basis.
(I adjust the slider way to the left.)
Similarly,
open Internet Explorer, and select Tools/Internet Options. Under
Temporary Internet Files, click the Settings button and select a
reasonable size for this cache area. Generally speaking, if you have a
fast connection, 5 Mbytes to 10 Mbytes is adequate; 25 Mbytes or so is
usually enough with a slower dial-up connection.
You
also may wish to consider uninstalling software you never use, and that
you’re sure you’ll never need again.
And, if you have lots of old files you don’t want to discard, but also
rarely use, consider compressing them into a Zip file. (Newer versions
of Windows, like XP, can compress old files automatically.) If you’re
using an uncompressed backup format, having old files in Zip format
will save you time and space; and even if you’re using a compressed
backup format, Zipping collections of old files will reduce the number
of separate files your backup has to track and process.
After
doing the above, and before every backup, empty the Recycle Bin, flush
Internet Explorer’s cache, and use “CleanMgr” (Windows’ built-in
cleanup tool: Start/Run/CleanMgr ; see also this and this ) to reduce
the remaining junk files on your system. You may wish to use other
tools, too, such as third-party cleanup utilities like CleanSweep or
the Clean9x.bat files
(http://www.langa.com/cleanup_bat.htm
).
ORGANIZE YOUR HARD
DRIVE
Imagine
you went to your local library, and instead of finding all the books on
the shelves, you found them in a giant pile in the middle of the main
room. The book you want might well be there; it might even be properly
entered into the card catalog. But finding it would involve extra work
that could have been avoided if the books were organized.
Now
consider: I get a lot of mail from people who say something like “I
have a 60GB [or 40GB or 20GB or whatever] hard drive, and it’s full of
files. How on earth can I back that up?” This is exactly the same
problem as the library with all the books on the floor, just in a
different guise. In that unorganized library, while it’s possible to
find the books you want, it’s needlessly hard to do so. Likewise, in an
unorganized hard drive with tens or dozens of megabytes of files and
folders all dumped into (say) the C: drive or partition, it’s very hard
to manage the files and to make reasonable backup sets. But it doesn’t
have to be that way.
--Now
think of your hard drive: You probably have some files and folders that
are valuable, but that essentially never change. For example, if you
have a collection of old legal records, or MP3 files, or old software,
or photo albums and the like; these files may need only to be backed up
once, and then never touched again.
--You
probably have another set of files--- some system and application
files, for example--- that change, but infrequently. If a file doesn’t
change much, it doesn’t need to be backed up very often. In fact, it
only needs to be backed up after it’s changed, and then can be left
alone until it changes again.
--Another
class of files changes from time to time, but irregularly: Think, for
example, of something like tax files, which go into high flux at tax
times, and then may otherwise lie dormant for long periods.
--Still other files--- email,
daily reports, schedule information, etc--- may change every day, or
multiple times a day.
All those file types have
differing backup needs.
--And
then there are some files that don’t need to be backed up at all: For
example, you may have some files you just don’t care much about--- if
you were to lose them, it wouldn’t matter much. This may be because
they’re easily replaced with a fresh download or reload, or because of
low intrinsic value.
If
all these many different kinds of files and folders, with their varying
needs for backup, are all tossed together onto (say) your C: drive,
you’re like that library with all the books in a pile. Yes, you can do
backups, but it will be an unpleasant and needlessly difficult task.
Windows Secrets
Newsletter • Issue 93 • 2007-01-25
Copyright © 1997-2005 Fred Langa/ Langa Consulting LLC. All worldwide rights reserved.
> Everton’s Genealogical Helper To Be Available Online as WorldVitalRecords.com
For
the first time ever, all of Everton’s Genealogical Helper issues, more
than 10,000 pages, went online January 31st at WorldVitalRecords.com.
“Since
1947, long before the Web, Web 2.0, and community websites, Everton’s
Genealogical Helper magazine has been connecting family history
researchers and printing their research results, offering an invaluable
aid to millions of other researchers,” said Walter Fuller, President
and Publisher, Everton Publishers.
The
Genealogical Helper emphasizes content, continuing education, and
research resources, for both professional genealogists and amateur
family history researchers. Leland Meitzler, one of the founders of the
genealogy industry, was recently named the managing editor of this
magazine.
“This
information, along with a wealth of highly informative articles, lists,
book reviews, etc., has made the Helper the ‘bible’ of the industry for
60 years. We at Everton are extremely
pleased
that this data, in its entirety, will now be available through
WorldVitalRecords.com,” Fuller said.
WorldVitalRecords.com
is currently using optical character recognition (OCR) to index the
Genealogical Helper issues from the past 60 years (1947-2007).
“The
Genealogical Helper represents the modern era of genealogy research. We
are pleased to include this valuable reference tool at
WorldVitalRecords.com. So much of what we know today as genealogy
research techniques have been introduced and defined in the
Genealogical Helper, and there is a lot of great information on each
page,” said David Lifferth, President, WorldVitalRecords.com.
In
the past, Everton has only indexed the last ten years of the
Genealogical Helper. Subscribers will soon have the opportunity to
access more than 200 issues. Each issue contains up to 200 pages.
“This
is a huge data set. The images are clear and readable and the OCR will
be very accurate and usable to our readers. Instead of searching
through thousands of pages to find a question your relative asked, you
can perform a simple search and find the information you need in a
matter of seconds,” said John Ivie, Senior Programmer,
WorldVitalRecords.com.
The Everton Genealogical Helper
collection will be housed in the Reference section at
WorldVitalRecords.com.
“Over
a half a century of data, inquiries, book reviews, articles on family
history and genealogy, as well as personal insight to research in the
field, make this data set an invaluable collection for our
subscribers,” said Yvette Arts, Director, Content Acquisition,
WorldVitalRecords.com.
This announcement was written by WorldVitalRecords.com: and posted by Dick Eastman on January 25, 2007
SPECIAL
OFFER: Enroll today and get the Ancestral Quest 12 family tree software
(a $30 value) for free with your 1 or 2 year membership. Hurry there
are a limited quantity available. Also be sure to check out our other
membership plans (as low as $29.95) and our other family history
products.
This is an
interesting looking site—and available at an affordable price.
AQ 12 is the new
version just out a few weeks. It
has links to Ancestry.com, and though not a member, in a short time I
have downloaded TONS of free information including parents, spouse,
children, birth, marriage, death, and residence.
LO
This is an excellent discussion on personal privacy! We can thank all the people who posted comments. Privacy is an important issue that unfortunately appears to be getting more and more complicated. The comment format seems to be an excellent way to get various points of view from people who are actually facing this problem—and want to do the correct thing. I know there are a number of members of our group who have faced this issue, and who have discovered that those involved may become angry and emotional. This is certainly not to our benefit, or to those who come after us. LO
> Process Changes
for WorldConnect Databases
The
Generations Network (formerly known as MyFamily.com and before that as
Ancestry.com) has made a change in its rules for submitting data to the
WorldConnect Databases. The changes were made in response to user
feedback and will streamline the procedures for correcting or updating
information. This is especially important when dealing with data
published about living people.
In
short, WorldConnect changed its database update/submission page to
eliminate the "forced" cutoff date of 1930 for submissions that
previously stripped away demographic and name information.
Now
the submitter may choose either to use a cutoff date or to have no
censorship by WorldConnect. Of course, the submitter also must state
that he or she has permission from each living person mentioned to
publish their data online.
RootsWeb,
also owned by The Generations Network, will not censor research
compiled from public domain information. Public domain information
includes basic facts such as names, dates, and places. Only the
submitter of the information can make such changes.
Every
family tree in the WorldConnect Project shows who submitted the file.
You will find this information near the top of the page in your
browser, along with the number of records in the file and information
on when the file was updated. If you have questions about the source of
their information or are trying to work out a discrepancy between your
file and theirs, you need to contact the submitter, not The Generations
Network.
If the submitter cannot be
reached, there is a process that allows for the removal of your name
from the database.
A new FAQ ("frequently asked
questions") has been posted for the WorldConnect databases. You may
wish to read it at: http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/FAQ/wcresults4.html
My thanks to Tony Rockefeller for telling me about these changes.
Eastman's Online
Genealogy Newsletter, January 28, 2007
Comments
"Public
domain information includes basic facts such as names, dates, and
places. Only the submitter of the information can make such changes."
All
names, dates, and places are NOT public domain. Thankfully, most states
still protect birth and marriage certificates for living people. There
are many other records and pieces of information that contain names,
dates, and places that would not be public domain. Hopefully this will
factor in to Rootsweb's appeal process. Individual submitters are not
always available or cooperative about removing information about living
people. As genealogists, let's respect the privacy of the living.
Posted by: Infinite
Ancestors | January 28, 2007
I agree with Infinite Ancestors
that not all descriptive information is in public domain.
This
is a really serious issue to me. I don't think "no date cutoff" should
be an option. There are too many people who have no idea WHY they
shouldn't publish information on living people.
I
believe the traditional cutoff is based on the last available census
that has been released, i.e., 1930. As people live longer, using
roughly a 70-80 year cutoff is not adequate to protect the privacy of
living people. I would rather it be 100 years, and I would really like
to see these companies enforce it.
I
spent over 6 months getting Ancestry.com to remove living information
about my father and my aunt. Customer support claimed that they didn't
"own" the GEDCOM databases, and therefore, can't alter them; that is
the current position in the FAQ linked above. I contacted Ancestry.com
AFTER I had contacted all of the submitters multiple times. Some never
responded, some had bad email addresses, some didn't know how to make
modifications, and some were uncooperative. I finally called
Ancestry.com's parent company and spoke to the PR/Marketing people,
saying I was going to start posting on forums about how they permitted
information to be published on living people. Amazingly, the living
information was then removed by Ancestry.com (not the submitters).
Ancestry
tried to argue that since my father and aunt were listed in the 1930
census, their information was in the "public domain." So, what they
were telling me was that once your name appears in a census, NONE of
your information is private, even if you are still alive.
Good luck getting information
removed. See this page:
http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/FAQ/wcresults4.html, and this one:
http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/FAQ/wcresults4.html
World
Connect is basically dumping the responsibility on the person who is
trying to have information removed, and not on the person who submitted
it. And, it doesn't sound like World Connect is going to help you much.
Posted by: soccermom
| January 28, 2007
Marriage
certificates are an open record everywhere.
The certificate gives the names of the bride and groom, the marriage
date, and the officiator's name. The license application is restricted
in most localities. The license application gives information like
parents' names, birth dates, SS#s, current address, and occupation.
Birth
certificates are restricted
not because they give the date of birth, but because certified copies
of the certificates can be used to fake your identity. Dates of birth
are published everywhere, like church bulletins and community
newspapers. If you vote, your voter registration information is a
public record, showing either your age or your date of birth. Your age
is published in many public databases, especially if you have a credit
card.
The
problem with the whole privacy debate is not about whether the
information is private, which it is not for the most part. The problem
is that in the past, we all knew the other people who knew our personal
information. Today, anyone in the world can get our personal
information without us knowing it. That's what makes people anxious.
Just
think back on your past. How many people ever went to one of your
birthday parties and met your parent? Right there, they know the day of
your birth, and can guess your birth year or just ask, and they know
your father's name and your mother's married name, and your family's
address.
The
"right to privacy", if it really exists, is not a "right to be
invisible." If you want to do something in the public eye, like getting
married or buying a house or voting, you have to accept that those
things require you to make some personal information public to the
world.
If
our banking system was more sophisticated and we didn't use our birth
date, mother's maiden name, and SS# as security codes, then the public
availability of that information would not cause the problems that it
does today.
Posted by: Paul K.
Graham | January 28, 2007 at 12:08 PM
What
has always troubled me about the sharing of information of people who
are living isn't that their public information can be found by one
means or another, but that by looking at the summary of their
information, a judgment can be made upon their character.
An
example is a female relative of mine, who had a child out of wedlock,
then married a man (not the father of her first child) and had another
child with him. They subsequently divorced, and then she had two more
children by two different companions. She later married yet another man
and divorced him shortly after. By her own admission, she has told me
that she had a lot of growing up to do, and she did it the hard way. It
is out of respect and love for this person and her children that I have
not included their personal information on my online database at
WorldConnect.
It
would simply be disrespectful to her, her children, and her former
spouses and companions to offer that information to the world. Yes,
someone could obtain her marriage records, and fortunately, the birth
state of her children have privacy laws in place regarding birth
records. It's not that she has something to hide, or even to be ashamed
of, but my relationship with her is much more important than placing
her information online in the name of "truth" or "public information."
Another
example is of a close relative of mine that was given up for open
adoption. I would never jeopardize the wonderful relationship her
adoptive family has with us, the biological family, by disclosing her
personal information to the world.
Remember
the three questions about repeating something you've heard? They can
also be applied to information about our living family members'
personal information: Is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind? I can
also add, would placing this information online jeopardize the
relationship I have with this person? And if it's someone I don't know,
what business do I have putting their information online? Would I want
someone else to do the same to me or my close family members?
Posted by: Miriam
Robbins Midkiff | January 28, 2007 at 12:42 PM
---> I agree with Infinite
Ancestors that not all descriptive information is in public domain.
I
think we are mixing and matching two separate things here. "Public
domain" is a legal term and hasn't changed in a century or so. Ask any
first-year law student. "Commonly accepted practice" seems to be
changing constantly.
Date
of birth, place of birth, parents' names, date and place of marriage,
spouse's name, property transfer documents, tax valuations and other
"personal data" has always been public domain and remains so today.
What has changed is the willingness of public bodies to publish that
information. Whether they publish the information or not, it still
remains in the public domain.
Publishing
or not publishing birth information or other personal information does
little to protect identity theft.
I was sharply reminded of this a couple of years ago when my daughter
needed to obtain a replacement birth certificate. Her original had been
lost. Since we were on vacation back in the small town where she was
born, she and I together stopped at the local town clerk's office and
asked for a certified copy of her birth record.
The
clerk asked for her name and date of birth, then checked the local
record book. The clerk then turned to a typewriter, inserted a blank
form, and filled it out with all the details, stamped it, and then
handed it to my daughter after the fee was paid.
This
was for a CERTIFIED birth certificate. At no time was my daughter ever
asked for identification. She could have been any young woman of
approximately the same age. Any young lady could have obtained the
CERTIFIED birth certificate and then used it to apply for a drivers
license, a passport, or a credit card.
In
fact, while privacy advocates may decry that such a practice leads to
identity theft, the fact is that the above was very legal and proper. A
certified birth certificate simply states that a birth occurred on a
certain date and that the listed man and woman are the parents. It
makes no claim that the person holding the certificate today is the
same person who was born on that date and time.
In
other words, the certified birth certificate is public domain
information, available to anyone who asks for it and pays the fee. It
is proof only of a past event, not of anything that is relevant today.
Anyone can and should be able to obtain that.
If
any government agency or credit agency accepts a birth certificate as
"proof of identity," that agency or company has made a grievous error.
Let's fix the real problem, not the fictitious problems of public
domain data. Require real proof of identity, not a fact from public
records.
Next,
I used to refuse to do business with any bank that is stupid enough to
use a mother's maiden name as "security info." There's no security
there at all, as any apprentice security expert can tell you. Any bank
or credit card company that uses such ridiculous "security methods"
needs to receive a wake-up message now!
A
few years ago I refused to complete a credit card application when I
was asked for my mother's maiden name. I suggest you do the same or
else use a bit of subterfuge that I enjoy:
Some
months later I filled out an application for a checking account and
again was asked for my mother's maiden name. I replied "Fudpucker." The
clerk raised an eyebrow but never questioned my answer. She wrote
"Fudpucker" in the form.
The
banks and credit card agencies do not care if you give them the correct
maiden name or not, they only want something that you can remember when
they ask. Trust me, I can remember Fudpucker.
Never,
ever use public domain information "for security purposes." That's stupid and is a clear
sign that the bank or credit card company has no clue about security.
Posted by: Dick
Eastman | January 28, 2007
In
my county (and this is comparable to what I've found in many counties),
you must be 18 to get a copy of your own birth certificate, or your
parents can get a copy assuming they are the parents listed on the
certificate. Otherwise, the county will only issue "genealogical"
copies if they occurred over 75 years ago. I have not yet been able to
get a copy of my mother's birth certificate from another county, even
though she is deceased, until 75 years have passed. But I respect that
protection. Death records can be obtained if you are a relative or a
person who can prove a financial interest. Again, if records are over
75 years old, they are openly available. Marriage certificates are
public, but the applications are protected. That's not to say that some
of the information on these documents can't be found elsewhere, but
should it really be made too easy to find out everything about you?
About your young children? I've been trying for years to get one
genealogist to remove information about my minor children from his web
site.
Procedures may be lax in some
locales, but that is not an excuse to discount the value of the
protective laws in place.
The
Internet makes it too easy to find information about living people. Our
laws and "commonly accepted practice" have not kept up with the
technology. There
used to be some measure of privacy afforded by obscurity. Identity
theft and fraud are only two of many reasons to respect the privacy of
living individuals. As others pointed out, it is the increasing
pervasiveness, commercialization, and lack of control of our personal
information that many find objectionable. And this information is
increasingly being used by others to make decisions about us that can
affect employment, credit, reputation, insurability, etc. An excellent
resource on these issues is the book, The Digital Person, by Daniel J.
Solve:
http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dsolove/Solove-Digital-Person.htm
In
the days of our ancestors, unless you were a prominent public figure,
you would personally know most of the people who knew your intimate
details.
I've
never understood why some genealogists insist on publishing information
on living people, without their knowledge and consent, particularly
when there is little or no connection between the two people. I'm an
avid genealogist and technologist myself, but we must remember that for
most of us genealogy is a hobby, the rest of it is real life.
Posted by: Patricia
Moore | January 28, 2007
"Marriage
certificates are public, but the applications are protected. That's not
to say that some of the information on these documents can't be found
elsewhere"
Very
true. Until the big privacy push bought on by the problem of
computerized database security in the last 25 years, millions of
documents were released into the public domain without the slightest
thought to redacting things like SSNs. For all the efforts made today
to protect that information, it's already out there for millions of
people in several different formats and it's too late for that
information to be recalled and "sanitized" for privacy reasons.
Posted by: Infinite
Ancestors | January 28, 2007
The
definitive statements of what is common practice, and what is legal
imperative seem to relate to US law and US practice. The stated legal
position of what is in the public domain in the US, does not reflect
the Australian reality. The time periods expressed for release of
birth, death and marriage information to the public domain is longer in
Australia
Posted by: Jason
Presley | January 28, 2007
> Excellent Answers Can Be Received On Rootsweb—The Bulletin Board Still Lives
When
I read the following comments I was immediately made aware once again
of the fact that the best replies frequently were applicable to
research in most any country, and could be of help to many of us,
regardless of our background. Though most of my ancestors are from
Norway, I have seldom had to do much searching to find the info I
needed.
I
believe it would be correct to say that the answers that are the
hardest to find, are often from the simplest of questions, and after
reading the responses below, I’m sure you will agree.
We
can imagine the young man, new to genealogy, was bowled over by the
many excellent responses he received—enough to keep him busy for months
to come. LO
From: "Alexandre
Gravem" <gravem@gmail.com>
Subject: Gravem
Norwegian Family
To:
gen-nordic@rootsweb.com
Hello
all, I am new to this list and this is my first post. My name is
Alexandre Gravem and AFAIK my family is originally from Norway.
I
live in Brazil and there was no immigration from Norway to here.
And none of my oldest alive relatives remember nothing about our
immigrant ancestor. I want to know if anyone in the list know something
about my family or about norwegians migrating to Brazil in the 1800's.
Thanks in advance,
Alexandre Gravem
------------------------------
From: Hugh Watkins
<hugh.watkins@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Gravem
Norwegian Family
To:
gen-nordic@rootsweb.com
sailors meet a local girl and
leave their ship, and I know of some Danes who went to San Paulo after
1945 because of the war.
start by using Brazilian records tracking you family backwards until
you find naturalization papers for example and ship's manifest of
arrivals.
"German immigration to Brazil
started in 1824 -- just after Brazil won independence from Portugal"
Hamburger Passagierlisten,
1850-1934 << this could be an
indirect route
Auswanderungsregister durchsuchen
<http://www.ancestry.de/search/rectype/default.aspx?rt=40>
<http://content.ancestry.com/iexec/?htx=List&dbid=1068>
only the years
1890-1913 have been indexed so far.
so not much help but that is the
approach
Hugh W
From: kumodoke
<kumodoke@planet.nl>
Subject: Re: Gravem
Norwegian Family
To:
gen-nordic@rootsweb.com
Are
you looking for a Norwegian family with the name Gravem? In which year?
And what are the names of the persons you are looking for?
When
emigrating people took often the name of the place as a surname, where
they lived before emigrating. They might not have used this as a
surname name in Norway, esp. not around 1800 is was usual to use
patronyms (=the Christian name of the father) as a kind of surname.
Look for how you could do
investigations in Norway at this site: <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~norway/>
Gravem
is a farm/place in Norway in the 1801 census in the county Buskerud in the place Sandsvær and in the
county More
og Romsdal at the place Sundal. In the 1865 census there is only one
farm/[lace gravem in Sunddal, More og Romsdal. In the 1900 census only
one farm gravem in Sundalen, More og Romsdal
So it might have been the case
that they came somehow from there before moving
<http://digitalarkivet.uib.no/cgi-win/WebFront.exe?slag=vis&tekst=meldingar&spraak=e>
Regards
Reina
From: Dave Hinz
<DaveHinz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Gravem
Norwegian Family
To:
gen-nordic@rootsweb.com
On 16 Mar 2007 11:32:38 -0700,
Alexandre Gravem <gravem@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Hello all, I am new to this list and this is my first post. My name is
Alexandre Gravem and AFAIK my family is originally from Norway.
Hi
- I do see Gravem as a Norwegian name when I look at familysearch.org.
searching for that as a last name. Take a
look there if you haven't already, looks like some good info. Most
likely, it is a farm name. I
don't know what you know already so pardon me if this is old to you
but, typically Norwegian naming up to the mid/late 1800s used this
form: First name Patronym Placename--literally, what's your name, who
is your daddy, and where are you from.
Let's look for Gravem then as a
location: Using an online version of Oluf Rygh's "Norwegian farm
names", at:
<http://www.dokpro.uio.no/rygh_ng/rygh_form.html>
...it lists exactly one farm with Gravem in the name.
(enter gravem in
the "farm name" and hit search to
see the hit).
Next, if it were me, I'd go to
the 1801 and 1865 census and find
Gravem in the parish of Romfo, in the municipality of Sundalen, in the
fylke (roughly, "county" or "state") of Romsdal. Start
here: <http://digitalarkivet.uib.no/index-eng.htm>. Click
on "1801" and "search"
Enter "gravem" into the "fast
search" box and here's a bunch of folks
living on that farm in 1801. Repeat for 1865, with luck you'll see names
which are familiar to you. If you can give
more info, I can spend
more time on this.
Dave Hinz
PS Once we know who came over, we
can look in the emigration lists if they exist to see when and where
they left from and for.
From: Stein R
<steinjr@nospam.com>
Subject: Re: Gravem
Norwegian Family
To:
gen-nordic@rootsweb.com
Umm
- the two statements ("my family is originally from Norway" and "there
was no immigration from Norway to here") would seem to be in conflict
with each other :-)
No,
there was no _mass_ emigration from Norway to South America. But
individual Norwegians winded up in a lot of unexpected places, possibly
due to the fact that in the 1800s shipping became a major industry in
Norway.
As
a couple of people have pointed out: the farm name Gravem existed in at
least two places - Sandsvær (near the inland city of Kongsberg, WNW of
Oslo) in Buskerud province and in Sundal (South valley, spelled
alternatively Sundal, Sunddal and Sundalen) in Møre and Romsdal
province on the NW coast of southern Norway.
Gravem
still exists as a surname in Norway. According to statistics Norway's
name web page (http://www.ssb.no/navn) there is 237 persons with Gravem
as last name as of now.
(The fields and buttons are: top
radio buttons are "female" and "male", fields
are "First name" and "Family name/surname", the grey button is
"search". Result says how many has that name).
Phonebook
online (http://www.telefonkatalogen.no) lists 262 hits on Gravem, 136
of which are on the west coast, of which 115 is in Møre and Romsdal
province, of which the majority (79) are in Sunndal municipality - for some reason I haven't
bothered going through them all :-) Result set at
http://www.gulesider.no/tk/search.c?q=Gravem
A
map search on Gravem at the yellow pages lists several farm in Sundal
parish, south of the city of Sunndaløra, where route 70 makes a 90
degree turn from going south to going east. Map search: <http://kart.gulesider.no/kart/map.c>
Enter name (Gravem) in white field on top, click on "Sok" (Search)
Results set looks like this:
Adresse og/eller stedsnavn
Gravem (Grend), Sunndal kommune
Larsstu Gravem (Bruk (gard)
(hovedbygn.)), Sunndal kommune
Negard Gravem (Bruk (gard)
(hovedbygn.)), Sunndal kommune
Oppigard Gravem (Bruk (gard)
(hovedbygn.)), Sunndal kommune
Utistu Gravem (Bruk (gard)
(hovedbygn.)), Sunndal kommune
("grend" means "village"/"cluster
of houses", "bruk" or "gard" means "farm", "hovedbygn." means "living
house (of farm)")
"Negard Gravem" means "lower
Gravem farm"
"Oppigard Gravem" means "upper
Gravem farm"
"Larsstu Gravem" means "Tenant
farmer Lars' rented part of Gravem"
"Utistu Gravem" means "Tenant
farmer's rented part on the outskirts of Gravem"
So
yes - it seems likely that the farm name Gravem comes from that little
cluster of farms around that curve on route 70, south of
Sunndaløra on the NW coast of southern Norway.
A google search (http://www.google.com) on
Gravem finds some odds and ends too. Among them some posts by you in
various other newsgroups, one of the artists in the Norwegian band
"Kåre and the Cave Men" is a Gravem, there is a skater named Øyvind
Gravem, an artist name Rhoda Achieng Gravem, a Gravem comp sci student
studying at the university of Oslo, a couple of American Gravems
(possibly descendants of the same family), a couple of university
lecturers and so on and so forth.
>
And none of my oldest alive relatives remember nothing about our
immigrant ancestor. I want to know if anyone in the list know
> something about my family or
about norwegians migrating to Brazil in the 1800's.
Always
start on the end where people live now and work backwards from there.
Make a note of all names your oldest living relatives do know. Check
achieves and/or registers in Brazil to try to find the name of your
Norwegian ancestor in Brazil. When you have the name (and when he
arrived in Brazil), you can jump to Norway and see if you can find him
(and his ancestors) there.
It
is likely that if your ancestor ended up in Brazil early in the 1800s,
he probably came there as ships crew (possibly just jumping ship
in
port :-), and might be hard to find in the official immigrant
records--assuming that there are official immigrant records from the
1800s
preserved and available over
there.
I
checked the emigrant registers online here in Norway (Norwegian records
online at <http://www.digitalarkivet.no>. Quite a few Gravems who
emigrated post 1880 through the port of Kristiansund (which would have
been the natural choice when coming from Sundal valley). But they all
list their destination as the USA.
Anyways - good luck on your
search. Start in Brazil, work your way back, and maybe you can
establish a link.
Smile,
Stein in Norway
GEN-NORDIC Digest,
Vol 2, Issue 47
> Red Flags
Raised About Concerns Over Vista's Legal Terms And Conditions
Vista,
the latest version of Microsoft's Windows operating system, recently
made its long awaited consumer debut. The first major upgrade in five
years, Vista incorporates a new, sleek look and features a wide array
of new functionality, such as better search tools and stronger
security. The early reviews have tended to damn the upgrade with faint
praise, however, characterizing it as the best, most secure version of
Windows, yet one that contains few, if any, revolutionary features.
While
those reviews have focused chiefly on Vista's new functionality, for
the past few months the legal and technical communities have dug into
Vista's "fine print." Those communities have raised red flags about
Vista's legal terms and conditions as well as the technical limitations
that have been incorporated into the software at the insistence of the
motion picture industry.
The
net effect of these concerns may constitute the real Vista revolution
as they point to an unprecedented loss of consumer control over their
own personal computers. In the name of shielding consumers from
computer viruses and protecting copyright owners from potential
infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of the "user experience"
from the user.
Vista's
legal fine print includes extensive provisions granting Microsoft the
right to regularly check the legitimacy of the software and holds the
prospect of deleting certain programs without the user's knowledge.
During the installation process, users "activate" Vista by associating
it with a particular computer or device and transmitting certain
hardware information directly to Microsoft. Even after installation,
the legal agreement grants Microsoft the right to revalidate the
software or to require users to reactivate it should they make changes
to their computer components. In addition, it sets significant limits
on the ability to copy or transfer the software, prohibiting anything
more than a single backup copy and setting strict limits on
transferring the software to different devices or users.
Vista
also incorporates Windows Defender, an anti-virus program that actively
scans computers for "spyware, adware, and other potentially unwanted
software." The agreement does not define any of these terms, leaving it
to Microsoft to determine what constitutes unwanted software. Once
operational, the agreement warns that Windows Defender will, by
default, automatically remove software rated "high" or "severe," even
though that may result in other software ceasing to work or mistakenly
result in the removal of software that is not unwanted.
For
greater certainty, the terms and conditions remove any doubt about who
is in control by providing that "this agreement only gives you some
rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights." For
those users frustrated by the software's limitations, Microsoft
cautions that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the
software." Those technical limitations
have proven to be even more controversial than the legal ones.
Last
December, Peter Guttman, a computer scientist at the University of
Auckland in New Zealand released a paper called "A Cost Analysis of
Windows Vista Content Protection." The paper pieced together the
technical fine print behind Vista, unraveling numerous limitations in
the new software seemingly installed at the direct request of Hollywood
interests. Guttman focused primarily on the restrictions associated
with the ability to play back high-definition content from the
next-generation DVDs such as Blu-Ray and HD-DVD (referred to as
"premium content"). He noted that Vista
intentionally degrades the picture quality of premium content when
played on most computer monitors.
Guttman's
research suggests that consumers will pay more for less with poorer
picture quality yet higher costs since Microsoft needed to obtain
licenses from third parties in order to access the technology that
protects premium content (those license fees were presumably
incorporated into Vista's price). Moreover,
he
calculated that the technological controls would require considerable
consumption of computing power with the system conducting 30 checks
each second to ensure that there are no attacks on the security of the
premium content.
Microsoft
responded to Guttman's paper earlier this month, maintaining that
content owners demanded the premium content restrictions. According to
Microsoft, "if the policies [associated with the premium content]
required protections that Windows Vista couldn't support, then the
content would not be able to play at all on Windows Vista PCs." While
that may be true, left unsaid is Microsoft's ability to demand a better
deal on behalf of its enormous user base or the prospect that users
could opt-out of the technical controls.
When
Microsoft introduced Windows 95 more than a decade ago, it adopted the
Rolling Stones "Start Me Up" as its theme song. As millions of
consumers contemplate the company's latest upgrade, the legal and
technological restrictions may leave them singing "You Can't Always Get
What You Want."
Toronto Star, Jan
29, 2007, article by Michael Geist
Michael
Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at
the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at
mgeist@uottawa.ca or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.
> $2 Million Sloan Foundation Grant To Help Digitize Thousands of Books at Library of Congress
Librarian
of Congress James H. Billington today announced that the Alfred P.
Sloan Foundation has awarded the Library of Congress a $2 million grant
for a program to digitize thousands of public-domain works, with a
major focus on at-risk "brittle books" and U.S. history volumes.
The
project, "Digitizing American Imprints at the Library of Congress,"
will include not only the scanning of volumes, but also the development
of suitable page-turner display technology, capability to scan and
display foldouts, and a pilot program to capture high-level metadata,
such as table of contents, chapters/sections and index. Past
digitization projects have shied away from brittle books because of the
condition of the materials, but "Digitizing American Imprints" intends
to serve as a demonstration project of best practices for the handling
and scanning of such vulnerable works.
"‘Digitizing
American Imprints’ will make a major contribution to the collective
body of knowledge that is accessible worldwide, further democratizing
the information that is a key to functional societies and economies,"
Dr. Billington said. "It is inspiring to think that one of these
books, many of which are in physical jeopardy, might spark the
creativity of a future scholar or ordinary citizen who otherwise might
not have had access to this wealth of human understanding."
Deanna
Marcum, Associate Librarian for Library Services, and coordinator of
the project, said: "The Library has been a leader in digitization of
special collection materials, and this grant from the Sloan Foundation
allows us to digitize, preserve and make available additional brittle
materials from our general collections."
"We
are delighted to partner with the Library of Congress, the world’s
largest library, in this historic digitization effort," said Doron
Weber, program director at the Sloan Foundation. "A significant number
of books from the Library’s great collection will now be available to
anyone in the world in an open, non-exclusive and non-profit setting,
thus bringing the ideal of a universal digital library closer to
reality."
The
Library of Congress’ proposal includes digitization of works in the
following categories included in the "Brittle books" from across the
Library’s General Collection.
U.S.
genealogy and regimental histories. The former includes many useful
county, state and regional histories, while the latter includes
histories, memoirs, diaries and other collections from the Civil War
period.
Six
collections of Rare Books including the Benjamin Franklin Collection,
selections from the Katherine Golden Bitting and the Elizabeth Robins
Pennell Collections of Gastronomy, a selection of first editions from
the Library’s Rare Book and Special Collections Division, selections
from the Confederate States of America Collection, the Henry Harrisse
Collection of Columbiana, and selections from the Jean Hersholt
Collection of Hans Christian Andersen.
Works
of photography focusing on the technical aspects of photography and the
artistic publications and biographies of photographers.
Digitizing
American Imprints will utilize the "Scribe" scanning technology of the
Open Content Alliance. Scanning is expected to begin within a few
months after an initial startup period to establish logistics, staffing
and resources.
"Partnerships
are crucial to help the Library of Congress realize our mission of
acquiring and making accessible a universal repository of information
in order to further human understanding and achievement," Dr.
Billington said. "We’re grateful to the Sloan Foundation and all of our
partners across a broad spectrum who share these goals and values."
The
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, founded in 1934, makes grants in science,
technology and the quality of American life. Sloan’s program in
Universal Access to Recorded Knowledge, directed by Doron Weber, aims
to increase access to recorded human knowledge by encouraging
digitization of material in the public domain, assuring public
archiving, preservation and open access of this material and fostering
its availability to people everywhere. The program has also supported
the Internet Archive, the Open Content Alliance – which includes over
50 of the nation’s biggest libraries and research institutions – the
New Orleans Public Library and On Demand Books.
Founded
in 1800, the Library of Congress is the nation’s oldest federal
cultural institution and the largest library in the world, with more
than 134 million items in various languages, disciplines and formats.
As the world’s largest repository of knowledge and creativity, the
Library is a symbol of democracy and the principles on which America
was founded. The Library serves the U.S. Congress and the nation, both
on-site in its 21 reading rooms on Capitol Hill and through its
award-winning Web site at www.loc.gov.
News from the
Library of Congress--January 31 2007
Library of Congress
contacts: Matt Raymond (202) 707-2905; Sheryl Cannady (202) 707-6456
Sloan Foundation
contact: Doron Weber (212) 649-1652
Perhaps some of you
have already read Eastman’s newsletter article on this subject less
than a week ago. While
it was never quite clear whether the info was from a BYU news release
about the conference, or his own reporting on the new online work being
presented, the thrust of the statements were that this was the first
online sharing collaboration. This in turn caused some responders to
point out (rather strongly) that this wasn’t true, and that there had
been online developments for some time by various companies.
It
appears that because of these replies Eastman is careful to avoid the
word “first” and goes out of his way to mention other software
companies that may have (at least to some extent) been making efforts
in the past.
Having
said that, the point appears to have been well made, and his excellent
report here on the convention should be carefully read by all. Personal
Ancestral File (PAF) has already “been declared a dead product by the
producers…and the fact that it is being replaced by the web-based New
FamilySearch,” is certainly an interesting development.
Kudos to Dick for
one of his best-ever articles…..LO
> A New Computer
Revolution is Rising Around Us
WARNING: This article contains
personal opinions.
I
recently attended the 10th Annual Computerized Family History &
Genealogy Conference held at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah.
This annual conference focuses heavily on the use of technology within
genealogy. After listening to presentations and talking with presenters
and attendees for several days, I walked away with one phrase echoing
in my mind: "web-based."
We
are in the midst of a computer revolution, both in genealogy and in
almost all other uses of personal computers. For the past 25 years or
so, home computers have exploded in use. During that time, almost all
programs we have used were obtained on disk or possibly by download,
then installed and executed directly on each computer, usually without
connection to any other computer system. This has worked well although
each home computer operated as an "island," isolated from other
computers in the neighborhood and around the world.
In
the world of genealogy, we have had a wide variety of programs to
choose from. Each of us built our own databases on our own hard drives.
Indeed, each database was an island unto itself. Maybe 10,000 people
recorded their lines of descent from one common Colonial-period
ancestor, but each of those 10,000 duplicated the efforts of the other
9,999 genealogists. Each of us recorded whatever we believed was
accurate, often without comparison to other researchers' efforts. I
sometimes think we collectively had 9,999 errors.
We
also beat our heads against "stone walls." Perhaps 9,999 genealogists
were frustrated by the same research question: "Who were the parents of
this particular person?" What 9,999 of us did not know is that the
10,000th person had solved the puzzle. Yet we rarely had easy access to
others' research efforts. We also suffered
from
user errors and hardware failures. More than one genealogist has seen
months or years of hard work suddenly evaporate when their hard drive
failed or a critical file was deleted or became corrupted.
The
emergence of the Internet and especially what is called "Web 2.0" is
changing all that. Today's low-cost connectivity anywhere and
everywhere allows for easy online collaboration and sharing among
users. The computer world is now immersed in social networking sites,
wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies.
NOTE: For a definition of Web
2.0, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_2.0.
For a definition of wikis, see http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2007/03/create_your_own.html.
For a definition of folksonomies, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy.
All
of this was quite visible at the recent Computerized Family History
& Genealogy Conference. First of all, the convention hall had free
Wi-Fi wireless networking available for everyone. Many attendees were
carrying and using Wi-Fi equipped laptop computers. It was interesting
to watch during presentations as many people in the audience had their
laptops open and in use. Many were taking notes of the lecturers'
presentations. Some were checking their e-mail. One senior official of
the LDS Church's Family History Department sat in the back of a lecture
hall while he simultaneously listened to presentations and went online
to index vital records for the Church's Internet Indexing project.
During
the conference, presentation after presentation showed many new ways in
which genealogists can collaborate together using various forms of
online services. We listened to such presentations as Utilizing the
Power of the Internet and Search Engines, the New FamilySearch (an
online collaborative database in which millions of people are expected
to participate in building one database of ancestors), FamilySearch
Indexing, Linux and Genealogy, The Chicago Genealogy Map Project, and
many more. Over and over, presenters uttered the words, "online" and
"web-based."
It
appears to me that the "islands" of genealogy data on individual hard
drives are merging into a smaller number of very large online
databases, accessible simultaneously to thousands of genealogists. Most
of these new databases even include source citations as to where the
original information was found. In the near future, or even today, we
can connect our computers to the Internet and research our family trees
and even record our efforts. Through this online sharing, the work that
each of us produces can benefit other genealogists. Likewise, the work
that the others accomplish can easily help each of us.
The
best part of all, in my mind, is that central databases are typically
backed up at least daily, if not more often. Local backups are stored
on-site, and duplicate copies usually are stored off-site for even more
protection. Crashed hard drives, accidentally deleted files, and other
such problems can still be inconvenient, but they are never disastrous
in the online world. In most cases, a systems engineer grabs the latest
backup copy and restores the lost information. As a result, all data is
available to all with only minor interruptions.
To
be sure, online collaborative databases aren't exactly new. Genealogy
databases have been online for 15 or 20 years. However, most were
isolated; they were "read-only." We could read the data on
FamilySearch.org, Ancestry.com, HeritageQuest Online, and other online
databases. However, we couldn't easily upload our own data or make
corrections to the many errors we found. Most of these online services
claimed they accepted corrections, but the process often required
months or years, if it ever happened at all. The databases have
remained inside isolated computer rooms, and the ability to add new
information or to correct erroneous information has been jealously
guarded by the database owners.
Seven
years ago, OneGreatFamily.com introduced a revolutionary new service: a
single online database containing data contributed by users.
Subscribers to OneGreatFamily.com could
download
a bit of software into their Windows computers and use it in a manner
that was somewhat similar to other genealogy programs of the time with
one major exception: the data was stored in an online database instead
of in individual "islands" on users' own hard drives. Any new data
added to the centralized database was instantly visible and useable by
others.
Like many pioneers,
OneGreatFamily.com was
ahead of its time. While revolutionary, it apparently did not become an
overnight success. The service was expensive, limited to Windows
computers, and ran rather slowly in the year 2000. Broadband
connections were rare seven years ago as most people used 56K dial-up
modems. Accessing large databases via dial-up is somewhat similar to
draining a lake through a straw; it is theoretically possible to do so,
but not very practical.
The
explosion of hardware speeds and the widespread use of broadband
Internet connections have since solved the speed problems; the typical
Pentium computers sold today can use OneGreatFamily.com quickly when
connected via broadband. Indeed, broadband costs have dropped
dramatically in the past seven years. Some of us even use mobile
(wireless) broadband connections while riding the commuter train, all
at costs roughly comparable to the fixed, wired broadband of seven
years ago. The connection costs for all are still dropping. DSL
broadband connections are now available in most areas for less than $20
a month, a price that is about the same as what many of us paid for
dial-up access only seven years ago. Even so, OneGreatFamily.com remains as a smaller player in the online
genealogy world.
In
the past seven years, other online services have appeared that offer
online collaboration. Some of these still use individual databases in
users' hard drives and then copy the data to centralized databases that
are available to others. Other databases accept data from users, but
the data has to be "approved" in some manner by the database owners
before new data becomes visible to others. Indeed, it has seemed like
database owners were "afraid" of their users; it has been difficult to
add data to many of the online genealogy databases. I suspect that many
database owners had a fear of erroneous data being added.
New
online services have helped quell those fears. Commercial and
non-profit services alike have shown that users can be trusted to add
data. While errors will always exist, a properly-designed collaborative
database allows for a "peer review" of all data and encourages others
to quickly correct the mistakes. This results in online databases that
contain even fewer errors than the jealously-guarded databases of only
a few years ago.
Wikipedia
is an excellent non-genealogy example, although there are others. This
non-profit encyclopedia has grown through contributions from tens of
thousands of enthusiastic users. The end result is a free, online
service that has ten or twenty times the information of any commercial
competitor, usually with a lower error rate. To be sure, errors are
sometimes made when new data is added to Wikipedia. However, more and
more users review and correct the information, the accuracy increases
over a period of time. The end result is a very accurate offering.
NOTE: For some eye-opening
information about the accuracy of Wikipedia versus Encyclopedia
Britannica, read the article at: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,69844,00.html.
We
are now at the threshold of similar offerings in genealogy. Past
databases, such as the International Genealogy Index, Ancestral File,
and World Family Tree, are either fading into obscurity or are being
modernized to include new data input capabilities not available before.
Other products are now appearing, including FamilySearch Indexing, New
FamilySearch, WeRelate.org, PhpGedView, The Next Generation,
PedigreeSoft, Retrospect GDS, Family Pursuit, and similar online
products. These are either available now or will be available within a
few months. Many of these allow thousands of genealogists to help each
other by contributing data to centralized databases.
Some
of these services offer huge disk farms with petabytes of available
storage space. (A petabyte is 1,000 terabytes, the same as one million
gigabytes.) Other products, such as The Next Generation and
PedigreeSoft, are aimed at the individual researcher or at groups or
societies, especially family name societies. Online, web-based
collaborative databases appear to be the wave of the future.
What
about today's existing genealogy programs that record data on the
"islands" of individual hard drives? Well, I wouldn't be too concerned.
Most of these genealogy programs are developed and supported by very
intelligent people. They will add whatever capabilities their users ask
for.
Personal
Ancestral File has already been declared "a dead product" by the
producers. In fact, it isn't dying so much as it is being replaced by
the web-based New FamilySearch, an online collaborative service.
The producers of New FamilySearch at the Mormon Church are encouraging
software producers to write web-based interfaces that will exchange
data with this new database. In this case, a new bird is already
arising from the ashes of the phoenix.
Producers
of The Master Genealogist, RootsMagic, Legacy, Reunion, Ancestral
Quest, Family Tree Maker, GRAMPS, etc. have not yet made any
announcements, nor do I expect any of them to make announcements
anytime soon. However, I suspect all of them are watching this new
revolution closely and will add new capabilities to utilize online
collaborative databases as soon as market pressures dictate. I am
betting that all the major players will survive and will offer even
better products than in the past. Most will probably allow for dual
databases: both local databases on users' individual hard drives as
well as remote collaborative databases. Users will have a choice of
using either local or remote databases or (optionally) both at the same
time. Data from one database could be copied to the other, if the user
elects to do so. All of this will remain under the individual user's
direct control.
When
used with collaborative databases, any of these programs will allow you
to find research already done, to add your own research efforts to the
group collaborations, and to either correct or append information to
erroneous data already stored in the collaborative database.
It
is interesting to note that the New FamilySearch will eventually
include an API (application programming interface). When available,
this API will allow programmers of The Master Genealogist, RootsMagic,
Legacy, Reunion, Ancestral Quest, Family Tree Maker, GRAMPS, and other
genealogy products to add functionality that lets their users directly
access data on the New FamilySearch through those programs. I suspect
that other online databases will have to develop similar APIs in order
to survive and grow.
I
believe that The Master Genealogist, RootsMagic, Legacy, Reunion,
Ancestral Quest, Family Tree Maker, GRAMPS, and other genealogy
products of the future will also use the power of your own computer to
produce reports, wall charts, pedigree charts, web pages, multimedia
scrapbooks, maps, and other capabilities not offered by online
databases.
Many
of these programs will also allow for creation of "mashups," the
combining of two or more online services in a manner never envisioned
by the creators of the online services. For instance, a future
genealogy program could extract geographic data from an online
genealogy collaborative database and then plot family migrations using
Google Maps. The geographic information could be further supplemented
with data extracted from the Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names. Dates
could be compared to online newspapers to see what political and
cultural events may have influenced your ancestors' decisions to move
to new lands.
These
same programs running in individuals' computers will make it easy to
move new data to and from the collaborative databases, including
scanned pictures, maps, and more. The centralized databases may hold
the raw data, but the various genealogy programs of the future will
allow you to get the information out of your computer and into a format
that can easily be read and shared with others.
In
short, the powerful genealogy programs of today will evolve to become
"gateways" to genealogy and other data stored in any of several
locations, including local data on your own hard drive. The individual
genealogy programs of tomorrow will allow the user to sort, filter,
analyze, and report information in ways that we have not yet imagined.
How
do you get ready for this future revolution? I have a surprise for you:
it is not a future revolution at all. It is happening now; the battles
are already being fought around you. I'd suggest that you read this
newsletter as well as other online and off-line genealogy publications
as time goes by. You will be reading the word "web-based" over and over.
I'd
also suggest that you should participate in one or more of these new
services. If the service you use works well, give your feedback to the
service providers. If it works poorly, also give your feedback to that
service's providers. Some of these new services will succeed and grow.
Others will whither and die. That's the normal selection process in
genealogy software and services, as well as in almost everything else
in life. Only the strongest survive and grow. You can be a part of the
natural selection process.
I believe this is a very exciting
time to be a computer-using genealogist!
Posted by Dick
Eastman
Comments
Dear Richard...
Some
of the software vendors that you mention have a "Collaboration"
feature, notably Ancestral Quest. Which allows for "some" functionality
toward this web-based concept. You mentioned another company on 14
March 2007 [Family Pursuit] who was going to do this kinda of thing,
and I contacted them with no reply.
One-Great
Family refunded my money to me because my database was too large, and
their system could not accommodate an upload. When I sent them the
database they said they had internal problems that would not allow it
to load.
This
idea is one whose time has come, but the logistics of handling millions
or trillions of records is going to slow the process considerably.
WorldConnect currently has the only working system I have seen that
allows a database of over 264,000 records to be easily updated,
indexed, and worked using Postem notes to relay corrections or
additions to data there.
Then
we have the problem of hoarding genealogist who have in many cases
spent long hours, and much money to get to be that 10,000th person you
mention. Who jealously hoard their conclusions and refuse to share with
the struggling 9,999. I have often spoken to the issue of "recreating
the wheel" that hampers growth and the free exchange of information.
Those who have, should share, so that the entire concept of "Family"
can be moved forward.
Too
many societies, and groups need to stop being the "islands" that
exclude the rest of the human family and allow for the free flow of
information and ideas. However, I am a firm believer in the march of
time. No matter how hard you cling to something, ideas manage to "leak"
out and what was once a dead-end for others can suddenly bloom into
creative, and organized discovery.
There
is a lot of misinformation in the genealogy world. That will not go
away until we all work together. I cannot tell you how many times a day
I get requests for more information or even offered large amounts of
information which is poorly documented. When first I started out, I did
not know the meaning of "sources". I was a kid at the time. But now
corrections to data, conflicts should be documented so that research
can move forward. We are all part of a Greater Family and working
together we should be able to bridge many of the issues that divide us
as a people and as a Family.
Posted by: Terry
Smith | March 25, 2007
I
think the collaborative efforts are great and the all computerized
genealogy is super; BUT who is going to police all the input errors.
I
just pulled up a family on Ancestry which worked its way back to the
mid 1700's and then the next generation was the mid 1800's and repeated
the same family. Awful.
Posted by: Alvie L.
Davidson CG | March 25, 2007
---> BUT who is going to
police all the input errors.
YOU are. Well, you and a few
thousand other genealogists.
The
biggest advantage of the collaborative databases (in my mind) is that
they are COLLABORATIVE. A properly designed collaborative database
allows one person to post data, be it accurate or inaccurate. Then
others can either change the information or append comments to it,
questioning its accuracy and pointing out better source citations
and/or better sources of information. Over time, the collaborative
databases become "groomed" more and more, ever increasing in accuracy.
Old-fashioned
databases allowed for inaccurate information to be posted and then
remain there more or less forever. The newer collaborative databases
may not yet be perfect but they are a lot better than those
old-fashioned non-collaborative databases. At least inaccurate
information can now be updated/deleted/replaced/improved.
My
guess is that not all the first collaborative databases will be
perfect. They will suffer from various deficiencies. However, as time
goes by, the "survival of the fittest" will prevail. The mediocre
products will eventually fade away as the better products become more
and more popular.
I suspect that ALL of them will
be better than the databases we have used in the past that do not
easily allow for corrections.
-
Dick Eastman
Our
Family organization has used The Next Generation software beginning
about two years ago to create a collaborative data base (fed by the
data of about ten of our most active researchers) and has been the
means of gathering not only the basic genealogy, but of histories and
photos of the ancestors, also their gravestones and a few other
memorabilia (in digitized format).
The
result is ecstasy on the part of many members of the family. To
illustrate, there were six hundred willing to come to a first ever
reunion last summer, from Canada, Florida, mid-west, west and southwest
United States. This phenomenon is real, wanted and much appreciated.
We
hope that there will be a way to interface "seamlessly" to the super
databases, ie Family Search at the LDS Church for one example, as the
input to those will be magnitudes larger than we now receive, but will
be extremely valuable, especially as properly documented.
Posted by: Alonzo
Cook | March 25, 2007
What protection can/will the
online databases provide against potential identity theft of personal
identifiable data?
Posted by: George
Schreckengost | March 25, 2007
Identity theft isn't much of an
issue for people born 100 or more years ago.
All
the online databases that I have seen have the option to hide
information about living people. That seems to solve the problems.
-
Dick Eastman
Hi, My 78 year old mind is a buzz
with all the new applications . I have FTM16 which meets my requirement
but
was shocked to find my worldconnect family history on one world tree
and Ancestry .com are charging people to view my information which I
supplied free of charge .From a result point of view the more
comprehensive a website becomes, it will make family history easier to
compile but research will now cost .
Posted by: Laurie
Thompson | March 26, 2007
Laurie
Thompson brings up an interesting point in this new publishing dynamic.
As we are increasingly encouraged to give away our research findings to
proprietary companies like Ancestry, so too do we need to be aware of
what these companies will do with the information.
If
you wish to make your finings truly part of the public domain, ask
yourself if the place you are publishing to will make your hard found
data available to everyone without fee or subscription or are they only
collecting the data to re-publish it to those who can afford entry into
related private holdings?
I
do not believe in hoarding research findings, but I do believe there is
a right way and a wrong way to publish on the Internet. I hope that in
addition to the phrase "web-based" genealogists will become familiar
with and learn the value of "open source" versus "proprietary"
publishing.
Blogs
such as this one are increasingly easy for private individuals to
create through open source companies such as WordPress.com. Wiki's also
seem to hold great promise for open source sharing of data. But beware
of companies offering an easy way to publish and then hoarding the
information themselves. With thousands of members, they may not exactly
be private islands, but I can't help thinking they look like huge gated
communities.
Posted by: John
Charlton | March 26, 2007
As
someone who is fairly new to this research I find this extremely
exciting. I have been brickwalled on finding my family history but can
find LOTS on my husband's family. Maybe some doors will open for me.
Thank you.
Posted by: Lois
Chapin | March 26, 2007
I would love to have access to
more ACCURATE information on my lines, as would we all. What
I recoil at is the thought of someone, like a dim cousin, correcting my
careful research with their poorly-documented material. On the
other hand, if we don't get our version out there, the
poorly-researched material may be there first, thus spreading errors
among the community.
Posted by: Margaret
| March 26, 2007
Posted by: Dick
Eastman | March 25, 2007
Re-published here
with the permission of the author. Information
about the newsletter is available at http://www.eogn.com.
=========================================================
CONTRIBUTIONS:
When
you come across something you think would be of interest to others who
are involved in genealogy, whether it be about genealogy, software, or
hardware, please send it to our editor, Luther Olson:
<lutherolson@sbcglobal.net>.
Please
include your name and all credits of author and publication. Information from online genealogy newsletters
can be used with these credits.
EASTMAN NEWSLETTERS
Articles from Eastman's Online
Genealogy Newsletter have a copyright by Richard W. Eastman. Please
feel free to forward this message to others. Information about the newsletter
is available at http://www.eogn.com
FAMILY TREE MAGAZINE
Reprinted with permission from
Family Tree Magazine Email Update, copyright 2003 F+W Publications Inc. To subscribe to this free weekly e-mail
newsletter, go to http://www.familytreemagazine.com/newsletter.asp. For
a free sample copy of the print Family Tree Magazine, America's #1
family history magazine, go to
<http://www.familytreemagazine.com/specialoffers.asp?FAMfreeissue>
ROOTSWEB REVIEW
Permission
to reprint articles from RootsWeb Review is granted unless specifically
stated otherwise, provided: (1) the reprint is used for non-commercial,
educational purposes; and (2) the following notice appears at the end
of the article: Previously published in RootsWeb Review: Vol. 5, No.
40, 2 October 2002.
LANGALIST STANDARD
EDITION
The
Langalist Standard Edition is a free email newsletter from Fred Langa
that helps you get more from your hardware, software, and time online.
Plus! Subscribers have access to over 100,000 additional Words in
special features, extra content and private links, All on a private web
site? All that, plus 30% more content In every issue, for just a dollar
a month! Full Plus! Edition info: <http://www.langa.com/plus.htm>
ALLEN COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY'S HISTORICAL GENEALOGY DEPT.
This
electronic newsletter is published with the intent to enlighten readers
about genealogical research methods, as well as inform them about the
vast resources of the Allen County Public Library.
We welcome the wide distribution of this newsletter and
encourage readers to forward it to their friends and societies.
UPFRONT--NGS
Each
issue of UpFront is under copyright of the National Genealogical
Society. Permission is granted to share the news and events portions of
UpFront provided you include the following statement:
"Originally published in UpFront with NGS, The Online Newsletter
of the National Genealogical Society.
http://www.NGSgenealogy.org/upfront.htm"
ANCESTRY DAILY NEWS
We
encourage the circulation of the "Ancestry Daily News" via non-profit
newsletters and lists providing that you credit the author, include any
copyright information (Copyright 1998-2005, MyFamily.com, Inc. and its
subsidiaries.), and cite the "Ancestry Daily News"
(http://www.ancestry.com/dailynews ) as the source, so that others can
learn about our free newsletter as well.
==========================================================
TELL A FRIEND -- SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION:
Others
interested in genealogy are welcome to receive these updates; if you
know of anyone else interested, tell him or her to send us an E-mail
To subscribe or unsubscribe to
this publication, send an Email to Luther Olson: <lutherolson@sbcglobal.net>
=============================================
* * * * NORTHEAST OHIO
COMPUTER-AIDED GENEALOGY Society * * * *
. . . .
. . . . . . Past issues of this
newsletter are available . . . . .
. . . . .
* * * * Visit our web site at <http://neocag.net>*
* * *