The general theme of my feedback will be the following: (1) don't automate something that people aren't already doing manually, and (2) the cloud has the wrong mix of pros/cons for this type of project.

> Secondly, the second you put your legacy on paper, that's it. You can no longer update it with more memories. It's frozen in that state.

But it isn't frozen. You can change it or add onto it.

You can think of "preserving your legacy" as a low-read, low-write data type. Once someone does this, they aren't likely to go back and edit it. They may add onto it with photos and whatnot, but they probably won't make changes to old content on a regular basis.

> With this website, they'd be able to continuously update it with stories, photos, etc.

To the extent people already do this (I have personally never seen it), they can just as easily use Facebook as a "digital scrapbook" so to speak. They can post all these types of content now, and their family already have access to it.

> Additionally, children, parents, and relatives will all be able to link up their own personal accounts to build an accumulated family legacy.

It seems like people largely preserve their memories as photos with captions. Again, it's something they do on Facebook, and they don't have to convince relatives to use it. All their relatives (especially older ones) already have accounts and previously-made connections.

> The older generation do like tangible items

I actually disagree. I don't think they care that much about tangible items. I do think they have a sense of how "long-lived" a medium is. They likely don't think of Facebook photo albums as something that will last for 20 years.

But that's not something any digital property can solve. People know that the web is ephemeral, and the content disappears as soon as the backing entity runs out of money. You'd have to establish some kind of trust to guarantee you'd be around for decades, similar to what graveyards do.