We have the technology. We can rebuild him.

There's a meme doing the rounds at the moment. It goes something like this:
In the future, scientists will be able to resurrect human beings - but not using DNA. Instead, they will rebuild you from the collective memories of people who know you.

So: Please post a comment describing one thing you know about me. Preferably something interesting, but factual. One day internet archaeologists will use this information to bring me back to life, so make sure what you say is accurate!

That's all very well, assuming that scientists will be able to rebuild us from the memories of others. But if that's the case, why are we worrying about accuracy? Or, more to the point, who gives a monkey's chuff about accuracy when you can pretend to have much better memories of people and so have new, improved versions of them built?
Surely, if the scientists of the future are going to be reading LJ for information about people in order to resurrect them, we should be giving them a view of humanity - and specifically ourselves - which is to our advantage.

With this in mind; instead of asking you to reply here with an accurate memory of me, I'm instead asking you to reply with a memory of me that you'd rather like to have. A memory which, if scientists act upon it when they reconstitute me, will result in a better David that the one you've got. What memory of me would you like to have?
In return, I shall reply to you with a memory of you that I'd like to have which will improve the resurrected you immeasurably.

^{And if you think I'm turning IP logging off after asking a question like that, you really have got another think coming.}

Does this make me an Auntie, then?

As of last night, I appear to have a niece. It's a dashed odd feeling.