Skip to content

Design memorandum and specification site for “memorial bots” that operate without improvisation, providing proof-carrying answers, maintaining transparency logs, and adhering to standards-based identity protocols.

Notifications You must be signed in to change notification settings

RobThePCGuy/PMG-Digital-Persona

Repository files navigation

PMG Digital Persona (Post-Mortem-Governed Digital Personas)

A design memo + spec site for building trustworthy “digital persona” systems after someone dies.

This is not “bringing someone back.” It’s a governed simulation constrained by an archived body of artifacts, with explicit consent, time delays, and auditability as first-class features.

What this proposes (in one breath)

A privacy-first, consent-first architecture for post-mortem digital personas where:

  • Access is time-delayed by default (cooling period)
  • Release requires multi-party trustee quorum (no single point of unlock)
  • Outputs are citation-bound to archived artifacts (or the system abstains)
  • Every meaningful event is logged in a tamper-evident way
  • Identity and authorization are standards-based (DIDs / Verifiable Credentials style thinking)

Why

Most “memorial bots” feel powerful but aren’t trustworthy. This project treats boundaries as the product:

  • If it can’t cite, it shouldn’t speak.
  • If policy says “no,” nobody gets to override it quietly.
  • If something smells off, a single trustee can suspend; resuming requires a quorum.

Read it (the site)

This repository is a static spec site (GitHub Pages). Start at the homepage and follow the sections:

  • Glossary (shared vocabulary)
  • Lifecycle (state machine)
  • Governance (roles, thresholds, deadlocks)
  • Citation Binding (how claims get tied to sources)
  • Ambiguity Ledger (design decisions + tradeoffs)
  • Spec Graph (how pages relate)

What’s in this repo

  • Static HTML/CSS/JS for the spec site
  • Supporting pages + a visual “spec graph” view

Status

Concept / design exploration. This is a spec meant to provoke good engineering and careful debate—not a finished product.

Contributing

Issues and PRs welcome, especially:

  • Threat model improvements (attacks we missed)
  • Governance edge cases (deadlocks, trustee loss, disputes)
  • Better “abstention UX” patterns (how refusal stays humane)
  • Clearer definitions in the glossary / ambiguity ledger

Principles (non-negotiables)

  • No deception mode (it must not pretend to be the person)
  • No financial/identity acts
  • No unsourced claims
  • No silent overrides

Contributors 2

  •  
  •