If we're going to compare those terms and conditions, then also consider this: the people who normally give those kinds of endowments are donating at orders of magntitude larger amounts. The size of those endowments gives the donors the leverage to attach those terms and conditions. What's ridiculous to me is expecting that a micro-endownment of $10 is going to give the donor the same kind of leverage.
I think that this is a pretty fair rebuttal, but I'm not sure I personally am convinced. First of all, this entity is inviting the comparison and second, they are saying that $10 is all you need to have something stored in perpetuity.
I wrote elsewhere: I know that there is nothing in the universe that is actually permanent. This is one of the insights from my meditation practice, things come and go. That includes my health and my life. So when I throw that idea out, I can see what they are really offering.
This isn't really meant to benefit you. This is meant to benefit our children. If the foundation survives longer than my own life, then I can put files that may be of value to my children and great-grandchildren. It would be up to them to value the preservation of their own digital history and cultural heritage to continue supporting this mission.
Both the founder of the Internet Archive and someone from the geaneology industry are among the board. I can see this idea being cooked up as, "hey, what if we were able to offer regular people their very own micro Internet Archive?" "What if we were able to pass on digital photos to be discovered by our descendants the way we have been able to discover photos from the late 1800s and 1900s?"
When viewed from that lens, about what happens to data after you die, $10 is a cheap gamble. This isn't really a promise made to me. This is a promise made to my kids. It may not be a promise that the foundation can keep, but I value contributing to my kid's heritage enough to risk $10.
I am still going to keep my Google Cloud and Dropbox, and whatever. But the 1 GB I have from this foundation is for a time capsule, stuff I really want to have a shot of passing it down. My kids won't care about my cat memes, or my passwords, or stupid videos. But they may want their baby pictures. They may want their grandpa's and grandma's dissertation.
When I die, my Google Cloud drive will shut down. But if things work out with Permanent.org, those files will continue to be there. I won't have to burden my kids directly with its upkeep. And perhaps, when they are older, they will come to value having access to it.
Maybe they have not sold their vision well enough. But I guess, they only need just enough people who gets it to kick this off. They are already 75% of the way there.
I guess the issue I have is that you have mentioned "cheap gamble" and "if things work out". This is not what they are claiming, except in the fine print.
Institutions that last a long time plan for changes in management. Contracts are part of that. I think I understand their vision, but they need to put themselves out there and be willing to be hauled into court to make "permanent" happen. If that's not what they are saying, then I guess I just don't understand.
> Contracts are part of that. I think I understand their vision, but they need to put themselves out there and be willing to be hauled into court to make "permanent" happen.
In cases of severe data loss or organisational insolvency, I'm thinking that there might not be an organisation to haul to court.
What might work for the end users of such an organisation is transparency of some sort, including the publication of regular financial statements and board minutes.
I'm ok with the level of accountability they have, and you are not. As far as a personal decision goes, that is up each of us individually. I'm ok with your decision not to participate.
Personally, I think the consumer protection and litigation has not done the US much favors, culturally speaking. It's gotten to the point that people think that Kickstarting pre-funded products have the same kind of guarantees. I have seen people get ragingly upset when their $5 kickstarter contribution amounted to nothing. I blew $1000 on a kickstarter project once knowing I may never see it again. (I got to go to a nice party out of it and got to meet Neal Stephenson and other fans; that was enough value for the $1k; they definitely did not deliver everything they promised).
It is why early-stage investment opportunities had been iffy -- unsophisticated investors treat what are essentially investments as if they were consumer products with the same kind of consumer product guarantees. It was why the SEC was founded in the first place, to protect "widows and orphans" and other unsophisticated investors ... and why regular folks get locked out of the better opportunities. Because somehow, our consumer mindset does not include an education on being an investor. There are no guarantees, just balancing risk and rewards.
With permanent.org, I'm investing into a future, not buying a product. I've thought through the risks and I made the decision for myself. I mean hell, during this pandemic, I have seen people want guarantees on even things like that their health. Get this treatment, save your life, or your money back? Demand service and sanitization supplies from hospitals, because the customer is always right? And now, I see this bizzare reaction of fear, derision, and ridicule on this non-profit vision. I'm not saying you are ridiculing this, mind; there's already enough of it from other commenters.
Don't get me wrong, I know there are plenty of scams around. It isn't as if I have not been conned before. However, it is often my pride, not my wallet, that has been hurt. I've seen much bigger cons, some even legitimized, with clear public harm. ... Enron causing brownouts to manipulate energy prices. Residential real estate valuation bubble ponzi scheme that is somehow normalized. The travesty called "No Child Left Behind Act" that shifted education further away from educating kids and teaching them to critically think while being emotionally intelligent. I can go on. Permanent.org's flaws in its marketing and messaging, its ambition to try to fund this through an endowment, is such a tiny blip when compared against the much bigger systemic problems and legitimized scams. If someone doesn't want to donate to permanent.org, then don't donate. Why are people getting so upset over this promise of "permanency"?
