Slashdot Mirror


Bletchley Park Facing Financial Ruin

biscuitfever11 writes "Bletchley Park, the home of Station X, Britain's secret code-breaking base during World War II, is barely scraping by financially, as shown in these images compiled by ZDNet this week. The site has undergone major redevelopment as an act of remembrance for the Allied efforts to break the German Enigma code, but now its future is clouded — among others, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation turned them down for financial assistance (since it doesn't have to do with the Internet). Its director estimates that Bletchley Park's funds will be exhausted in three years. Hungry land developers are circling. This is an insightful look at what's happened to Bletchley Park these days and the pain it's going through."

234 comments

  1. Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    These aren't starving kids in Africa, for crying out loud. It's just a museum. And, however important the historical significance of the site, it's hardly fair to make a snide remark about not getting funding from a foundation that has MUCH more important issues to deal with. If anything, they should be getting funding from the British government (and obviously THEY don't think it's so important).

    I know this is /., and there is many a Bill-basher here who would probably take ANY opportunity to blast him, but COME ON.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yea! Let the Brits destroy their heritage like we do in the US. Tear it down and put a parking lot on it, that's what I say.

    2. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Kids in Africa are starving for reasons the Gates Foundation can't fix.

      That written, I view the demise of Bletchley Park the same way I look at copyrights: Doing something great a long time ago shouldn't guarantee you a lifetime of financial benefits. Even if you saved the world.

      Great you broke codes but a long time has passed since then. Figure out how to pay your own way.

    3. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I hope your irony is intentional.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by RattFink · · Score: 1, Informative

      These aren't starving kids in Africa, for crying out loud. It's just a museum. How this is bashing? A person who it known to donate a lot of money to computing museums doesn't bail this one out. It says more about the urgency of the situation then some sort of Gates bash.
      --
      "I don't necessarily agree with everything I say." - Marshall McLuhan
    5. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah. My initial question here was "Why doesn't the government step in?" What, does England have so much history that it doesn't see the value of protecting a historic site that's from something as new as the last century?

      Here in the states, we've got the NSA cryptologic museum, where among other things you can tool around on an old Enigma from WWII. Can't imagine why Britain wouldn't want something like it.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    6. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And, however important the historical significance of the site, it's hardly fair to make a snide remark about not getting funding from a foundation that has MUCH more important issues to deal with.

      Indeed... there's no angle here where Bill can trade charity for Windows sales to the government as far as I can tell... little wonder he turned 'em down. Before you think this is 'Bill-bashing', take a look at Mexico as a huge example of how Mssr. Gates does marketshare-pushing in developing countries.

      If anything, they should be getting funding from the British government (and obviously THEY don't think it's so important).

      Now here, I agree. If it were important to Parliament, they would've obviously done something by now. As it is, Colossus could be moved to the appropriate national museum and given its own place of honor. This would likely give it a wider audience and a more convenient viewing.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    7. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1
      Dude, you didn't have to post AC; unlike most AC posts, your argument was quite coherent and could use some up-moderation.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    8. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by caluml · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What, does England have so much history that it doesn't see the value of protecting a historic site that's from something as new as the last century? We do have an awful lot of history. Near where I grew up is a 13th century castle, and a little further a copy of the Magna Carta from 1215. The town itself was founded in 888. Yes, without a 1 in front. Throw in lots of roman stuff, and things I've never even been told of, and yeah, something from 1945 might not be thought to be really that *wow*.
    9. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by theTrueMikeBrown · · Score: 1

      I agree that this is not Bill's responsibility to fix, however I think that they should get funding from somewhere.
      Turing worked there for crying out loud. He was practically the father of the CAPTCHA (or something like that).
      We at slashdot need to make a stand. We should take up a collection for Bletchley park.
      I will start. I am prepared to match any contributions made to help Bletchley park.
      Did I mention that I am the president of Nigeria, and that I have money that I need to get out of the country?

    10. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by BytePusher · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Maybe it has something to do with the British government looking more and more like the German government just before WW2 and would like their citizens to forget... Oh, would you like a fresh cup of surveillance with your papers anyone?

      On another note if Godwin's law were a law, this entire story would not exist. Thank God it's not a law social or civil.

    11. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ugh, what-ever.
      every single inch of soil has some history to it.
      If you really think saving this place is worth time and effort, please donate some of your money.

      My guess is not many people feel like you do.

    12. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go be a worthless waste of protein somewhere else, troll.

    13. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The British Government decided quite a while ago to get rid of any responsibility it had for looking after any of our historic buildings. Instead they set up the National Lottery to directly tax poor and stupid people with a remit to help good causes such as this one.

      Even before that though most of these things are maintained ( or not ) by organisations such as the National Trust or museums and charitable organisations. I can't think of a single thing such as this building which is directly supported by the government, it's just something that in the UK has never been up to the government but is left to private individuals or charitable organisations to deal with. In general the government through it's local councils have no interest at all in maintaining any of our more historic buildings being quite happy instead to let them stand around empty for decades until they have rotted sufficiently to be knocked down and redeveloped. All most all of Birminghams historic Edwardian public baths are currently suffering from this treatment.

      There was recently a BBC programme which allowed viewers to vote on which one of a dozen or so worthy historic buildings was given money for maintenance whilst letting the rest continue to fall into disrepair. Britains long range Vulcan bomber is being preserved and renovated by a private group of enthusiasts and BA are refusing to sell Concorde to a similar group of enthusiasts for preservation so in general here in the UK what is preserved and what is not is more or less a random lottery with many things falling by the wayside and being crushed underfoot.

    14. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 1

      i should have finished that post with: "otherwise it wouldn't be in this situation."

    15. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by BodhiCat · · Score: 1

      Yes, its an enigma to me why they don't preserve this historic site. I guess they want to build some ultra-modern skyscrapers. Hopefully things are turning around for the museum.

    16. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by l-ascorbic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the government won't spare the money to protect Stonehenge of all places, it's unsurprising that other stuff is neglected too.

    17. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That written, I view the demise of Bletchley Park the same way I look at copyrights: Doing something great a long time ago shouldn't guarantee you a lifetime of financial benefits

      Your comparing efforts to save an important part of our history to copyrights?

      Figure out how to pay your own way.

      Am I the only one that sees value in preserving important parts of our history for future generations?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    18. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by dyefade · · Score: 1

      I too hope it is, but even if it isn't, his point is not diminished.

    19. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by l-ascorbic · · Score: 4, Informative

      While its funding is not great, English Heritage protects hundreds of historic buildings and other heritage sites. They're a government-funded quango, attached to the DCMS. There are equivalents in Wales and Scotland.

    20. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Interesting
      What, does England have so much history that it doesn't see the value of protecting a historic site that's from something as new as the last century?

      Yep, that's pretty much it. There's only so much funding to go around, and there are thousands and thousands of sites of historical interest competing for it. Bletchley isn't really such a strong competitor; the site itself is of no architectural interest, it's nothing to look at. All it ever was was a bunch of army huts. There are ancient castles and manors falling down which are much more photogenic and attract more tourists.

      To me Bletchley is of more intellectual than historic interest: it's where Turing did his work founding the discipline of computer science. As such, I wonder if the best way forward would be for the site to become a technology park, or a research centre attached perhaps to the OU? That would preserve what was important there - the intellectual tradition - even if it meant doing away with most of the WW2-era buildings.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    21. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Shakrai · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Maybe it has something to do with the British government looking more and more like the German government just before WW2 and would like their citizens to forget... Oh, would you like a fresh cup of surveillance with your papers anyone?

      Yes, because there is state sanctioned violence against Jews going on in the British Isles right now. There's also state sanctioned violence against the political opposition too. And let's not forget the Enabling Act that Gordon Brown is trying to push through Parliament at this very moment.

      On another note if Godwin's law were a law, this entire story would not exist

      Godwin's law doesn't exist because of stories about WW2. Godwin's law exists because of idiots like you that make stupid bombastic comparisons to Nazi Germany that are completely divorced from any sense of reality or perspective and serve only to incite passions and flamewars.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    22. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Telvin_3d · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But what does preserving the history mean? In a case like this, the history is extremely well documented. Not only that, but the value of the site itself lies solely in the fact that it IS well documented. The building and grounds are not inherently historically valuable.

      When you talk about preserving a site like this it's not the same way you would talk about preserving an area of Greek or Roman ruins. It's not like they are going to excavate it at a later date and discover unknown relics.

      Without the knowledge of what has happened there, the site is meaningless. And if you have the documentation the site becomes more about the emotional and symbolic attachment than historical value.

      And eventually it gets down to the fact that if we faithfully preserved every place that anything interesting had ever happened at it wouldn't be long before our entire society would be static.

    23. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I agree. If it was worth it to people, they'd be paying to go visit it and it'd be making enough money to stay in business.

      That's really all there is to it. It's not even just not worth it to the British government, but obviously not to the British people, either.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    24. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And eventually it gets down to the fact that if we faithfully preserved every place that anything interesting had ever happened at it wouldn't be long before our entire society would be static.

      I would agree with that, but you have to weigh the "anything interesting" part against the bigger picture. In this case, the "anything interesting" was an Allied effort that saved thousands of lives and probably shortened the war by a year. I tend to think that's worth preserving and that the value to society is greater then allowing a developer to build a strip mall or cookie-cutter condos over it.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    25. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by UberDude · · Score: 1

      Kids in Africa are starving for reasons the Gates Foundation can't fix.


      I imagine $38 billion is enough for a small invasion. Take control, run it as a colony for say 25 years, then transfer power back to the people when there's a stable system in place. It's not ideal, but at least nobody starves.
    26. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      How important is it though really? I mean, we're all a bunch of geeks, and we've all read Cryptonomicon, so we all know what Bletchley Park is. But do you think most people know or even care about it? I say, take the artifacts that are salvagable, and put them in some other museum. Canada has a Museum of War, I'm sure the UK has something similar. Putting them there, or somewhere with more traffic, would probably allow many more people to find out about the role played by cryptographers in the war. A lot more so than trying to save something that so few people visit that they can't afford to keep it open.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    27. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Funny

      I imagine $38 billion is enough for a small invasion. Take control, run it as a colony for say 25 years, then transfer power back to the people when there's a stable system in place. It's not ideal, but at least nobody starves.

      What could possibly go wrong with that idea?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    28. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      To claim that the British government is turning Nazi would be a little extreme, but I'm starting to doubt that the top levels are trying to help anybody but themselves.

      There's no state sanctioned violence against Jews, but reading about how to make explosives is enough to get you taken into custody without charge. I got stop by police in Heathrow, and asked for identification, while waiting for a plane.

      According to the piece of paper I was handed telling me about it, they need due cause to stop you. Or they can just claim it's related to terroism, and do whatever they like.

      And then of course you've got Gordan Brown, who was "promised" the job of prime minister for several years... that's not exactly my idea of democracy.

    29. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by robably · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that sees value in preserving important parts of our history for future generations?
      No, actually I think you're in the majority, but that still doesn't mean you're right. I understand the need to record our past, but not to preserve it at the expense of being able to do something useful with it now.

      I think the reason many people feel a need to museumify old buildings is because much of what we build now is ugly and inhuman. That is the problem that needs to be fixed, and then let the rise and fall of beautiful buildings continue without sectioning off parts of our increasingly cramped world as museums.
    30. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has been documented and archived many places and times. We can recreate it in a holodeck simulation later :)

      The MEMORY is far more valuable than any "item" or material thing. Typical of a materialistic person to not understand that.

    31. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      To donate to the Bletchley Park Trust, please contact the Trust's director, Simon Greenish, or his personal assistant, Sue May, on +44 (0)1908 640404.

    32. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      But unlike copyrights, Bletchley park doesn't want to preserve itself for enrichments of its owners, but because those who are looking after it consider it to be important to preserve it for the world.

      If copyrighted works ceased to exist the moment copyright expired, I'd be all in favour of perpetual copyrights.

    33. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by BytePusher · · Score: 1

      First, Godwin's law doesn't exist. My and your ability to reply proves that. I think it's a silly and dangerous idea to forbid talking about WWII, because we're all of the same nature and should heed , process and discuss the horrific warnings of history.

      Second, the German aggression towards Jews was simply one manifestation of one culture or people group oppressing another. It's not bombastic to believe genocide and oppression might happen again. The reality is, Britain is trying to control their people with electronic surveillance just as Germans did with informants. It's simply a word of caution and a call to remember and to reason.

    34. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by BrettJB · · Score: 3, Informative
      Slow down there, tiger! FTFA:

      The Bletchley Park Trust receives no external funding. It has been deemed ineligible for funding by the National Lottery, and turned down by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation because the Microsoft founder will only fund internet-based technology projects. The submitted was merely paraphrasing what was in the article, not necessarily having a "go" at Uncle Bill. I actually appreciated the bit of clarification (I was curious as to why one would think a foundation that seems more concerned with disease and poverty would want to save what amounts to a museum...)
      --
      Smell that? You smell that? Burning karma, son. Nothing in the world smells like that...
    35. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's the thing, though: The site was not important to their work. They could have done this in a trailer somewhere. I'd bet that they could sell the land and then set up a big enough endowment to save one lot for a small museum to display the equipment and such.

      I think people want to save this site because it happens to be a grand old mansion... if this thing were a blah standard-issue 1940s military brick building people would be so sentimental.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    36. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Comboman · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I would agree with that, but you have to weigh the "anything interesting" part against the bigger picture. In this case, the "anything interesting" was an Allied effort that saved thousands of lives and probably shortened the war by a year. I tend to think that's worth preserving and that the value to society is greater then allowing a developer to build a strip mall or cookie-cutter condos over it.

      But you could make the same argument for preserving a factory that built tanks, a shipyard, an airfield, a university laboratory that developed a slightly improved radar. Eventually you have nothing but museums. Some are necessary, but you have to draw the line somewhere. The building didn't shorten the war; the people who worked there did. We honour them by documenting their successes and continuing to build on their work in cryptography, not by turning their workshop into a shrine.

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    37. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You really do a disservice to everyone when you compare modern-day Britain to Germany under Nazi rule. Public cameras? Gimme a break - let me know when they start tattooing people and invading Poland.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    38. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      No. The Gates Family simply has no class.

      Surely it wouldn't break the bank to help keep going a landmark of the industry that gave them their fortune.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    39. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Well, England was unified as a country in the year 927, and had people on it long before that. Stonehenge was built in 2000 BC. It has quite a few historical sites to uphold, considering it's history. The US on the other hand doesn't have much history to protect. They only have what's been around in the last 300 years or so . Before that, it was mostly the Natives. And they didn't build anything that lasted through history. Actually it seems quite weird to me that the North American Native population didn't build anything that's still around today. All the other ancient cultures seemed to have built something (mayan temples, egyptian pyramids, great wall of china, Easter Island, etc.). Seems to me that that North American natives are the only ones who didn't create any big monumments. And maybe the Australian Natives. Please feel free to point out any monuments I may be missing.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    40. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      First, Godwin's law doesn't exist. My and your ability to reply proves that.

      Split hairs often, do you?

      I think it's a silly and dangerous idea to forbid talking about WWII, because we're all of the same nature and should heed , process and discuss the horrific warnings of history.

      Godwin's law doesn't forbid talking about WW2. Godwin's law states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." It is traditionally interpreted as a warning against the use of inflammatory rhetoric or exaggerated comparisons. That you had to specifically cite Godwin's law (when no one else had brought it up) tells me that you suspected that your original post might have met one or more of these criteria.

      It's not bombastic to believe genocide and oppression might happen again

      No, it's not. It is however bombastic to compare the British surveillance society with Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany was a bit more than a surveillance society -- it was an entire political movement that advocated for the violent conquest of Russia, the oppression and subsequent genocide of whole ethic groups (not just the Jews) and a culture of violence used to intimidate political rivals and destroy a functional democracy.

      There's nothing going on in the UK right now that even remotely compares with the Night of the Long Knives. There's nothing going on in the UK that even remotely compares with the Nazi oppression of free speech and of the political opposition. The UK isn't scapegoating an entire race for every single problem that they face. The UK isn't planning to invade any of her neighbors. Her citizens are still free to elect their own Government and could throw Gordon Brown and the Labour Party out on their ass whenever they'd like.

      It's simply a word of caution and a call to remember and to reason.

      Words of caution are fine but you undercut your own argument when you make comparisons to Nazi Germany. The surveillance society scares the hell out of me -- but it doesn't have anything on Germany in the 30s.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    41. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 4, Funny

      To be fair though if it really is that important to all those hippies and druids and the like you'd think they'd all cut their hair, get jobs and put some money towards doing something about it's preservation !

    42. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by UKRevenant · · Score: 1

      It strikes me that they have 3 years of funding in place, which simply means 3 years to get visitor numbers up to a sustainable level. How do you get coverage on as many channels as possible to advertise your attraction without paying a penny? Is there any way to get a message out that Bletchley Park is open for visitors to see a working recreation of a colossus computer? Oh hang on a minute, maybe spread some news of impending doom and see how many people report on it. This is multi-level marketing, firstly to the general populous "Hey We're here!" and also to the myriad of funding bodies "We have important things here to protect and show the world". I hope if generates a nice boost in their revenue as I for one would be sad to see the collection dispersed to other sites. These types of site always take time to build critical mass, it is always a race to see if they can before the money runs out. Perhaps they should see about getting regular displays of things like James Bond movie props and other espionage related memorabilia.

    43. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      s. Instead they set up the National Lottery to directly tax poor and stupid people with a remit to help good causes such as this one.
      I don't get why people think that only stupid people play the lottery. I think of it as a form of extremely high risk investment. Sure, most people are going to lose money, especially over the long run. But if you win, the payouts are huge. It's not a good idea to invest every single dollar you have in trying to win the Lottery, because in the end, you'll still likely be left with nothing. However, putting $20 a month into the lottery, over a 20 year period, would only amount to $4800 invested, and even with a 10% rate of return would only end up being $14,000. However, if you win, you could end up with millions. If you're going for the sure thing, then not playing the lottery is the best choice. But for a relatively small investment, you could end up with a huge sum of money. No other form of investment even comes close to offering that kind of rate of return.
      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    44. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by atari2600 · · Score: 1

      There is no real comparison. The British actually have a richer heritage and history unlike the USofA. That and the Brits and the other Europeans took care of the tearing down part a couple hundred years ago.

    45. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      Kids in Africa are starving for reasons the Gates Foundation can't fix.
      The reasons kids are starving in Africa is exactly what the Gates Foundation is trying to fix.
      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    46. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by ktappe · · Score: 1

      I agree. If it was worth it to people, they'd be paying to go visit it and it'd be making enough money to stay in business. It's chicken and egg. Only by the site persisting can people become educated as to its significance and then realize its worth. Those of you who take the self-sustaining stance are those who see the price of everything and the value of nothing.
      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    47. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by cliffski · · Score: 4, Interesting

      have you ever BEEN there?
      I have, about 2 years ago. And it's fantastic. You might thinkt hats long as someone took a few photos of it, we can bulldoze it and build luxury flats there. But i disagree.
      I normally HATE guided tours of places, but the tour of bletchley is fantastic, given by genuine experts, some of whom worked there, and who have a very deep understanding of technically how the cods were broken. the museum there is awesome, and the re-created machines that you can go and look at are truly astounding. This is literally the birthplace of computing. And you would happily let it disappear?
      Here is some pics I took of some of the rebuilt machines, with the guy who did the rebuilding pictured:

      http://www.positech.co.uk/blog/enigma1.jpg
      http://www.positech.co.uk/blog/enigma2.jpg
      http://www.positech.co.uk/blog/enigma3.jpg

      BP is well worth saving. Much more so than just ANOTHER stately home, of which we preserve hundreds.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    48. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by iapetus · · Score: 1

      What version of Godwin's law are you working with? The law states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

      Your ability to reply is not impacted by this law.

      --
      ++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
      Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
    49. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      I dunno if there's any museum who would be willing to give up so much of their precious space for one single exhibit. It's called Colossus for a reason. Maybe the Imperial War Museum North, but I dunno who else would have the space.

    50. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by iapetus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would the Gates family feel any obligation to fund a war museum in another country? How is not doing so a lack of 'class'? This makes so little sense that I can only assume it's some variation on the Chewbacca defence...

      --
      ++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
      Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
    51. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I look at the size of the Gates Foundation, I think that they're one of the only organizations that possibly could start fix some of the REAL problems.

      There are hundreds, maybe thousands of groups that send aid to Africa in various forms. Why we need a mega-charity to do the same stuff everyone else is doing is beyond me.

      Once all of Buffett's and Gates' fortunes are officially added in, it will be approaching $100 BILLION. That's the kind of money that can be put towards real change.

      Fuck sending medicine. Open a non-profit research center to find a cure for the top maladies in Africa. Give away the results 100% free. Hell, one of the little charities will probably even pick up from there and start churning out medicines for free once they've been invented.

      Fuck sending food. With the kind of money they've got, they can figure out something better than a continent dependent on shipments from outside for the rest of eternity. Hire some teams of people to solve it.

      Then there are the tremendous political issues, which are at the core of Africa's problems. With that kind of money, you can buy politicians in every country in the world to make positive changes. Once people on the outside stop fucking up Africa, it'll be a lot easier to get people on the inside to stop fucking it up too.

      So, yeah. Totally off-topic, just like even mentioning the Gates Foundation in the summary. Yeah, they're KIND OF doing that, giving a million here and half a million there to research organizations. But again, that's something rich individuals do all the time. I mean, come on, they're handing out $400,000 scholarships. I'm sorry, but they could blow $100 grand on hookers and coke, send someone to a good school, and still have money leftover.

      The only other "charity" capable of more is a government's foreign aid (which is about $100B per YEAR for the USA, making it much much bigger than Gates Foundation) but seriously, I think we all know a government isn't really capable of that. Even their aid is always politically motivated.

    52. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by gallwapa · · Score: 1

      The Chicken is the eggs way of making another egg. In this case, the egg isn't producing a chicken, therefore, it will die out.

    53. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't claim they weren't trying, I claimed that they can't do it.

    54. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sir, Bletchley Park needs to be torn down to build a new bypass.

    55. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      And who cares about thousands of years of technical drawing (the predecessor of software code writing nerdism), it's dead now.

      http://www.pipingdesign.com/FridayFunnies/drafting/album/

    56. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Let the markets decide. Stodgy old things like cultural heritage should be scrapped immediately if they can't generate enough paying customers to make way for shiny new things that can. People should pay (and pay dearly) to see educational and culturally or historically significant things.

    57. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by digitig · · Score: 5, Informative

      The site is a lot more than the mansion (which isn't very grand by British standards). The mansion has quite extensive grounds, which are covered by ugly, squat WWII brick buildings -- I did my apprenticeship in one of them, D-Block (I don't know whether all the aircraft navigational aids that we were trained on are still on the field at the back of the estate). At that time it was on the edge of a sleepy little market town, but the planners had decreed that it become part of the new city of Milton Keynes, filling in a rural gap in Britain's axial belt, a conurbation running from London up through Birmingham and The Potteries up to Manchester and Liverpool. That means it's now an expanse of private parkland in the middle of a city, a few minutes walk from Bletchley Station. I bet it gets stung badly for rates (local taxes), and the land would be worth a fortune. The museum happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I think the smart move would be to move the museum into the mansion and sell off the rest of the land -- maybe keep the lake in front of the mansion and a bit of the green, to justify the name "park". That should raise enough to keep them going for quite a while, and keep some of the historic site.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    58. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      There are ancient castles and manors falling down which are much more photogenic and attract more tourists. Yes but how many of those manors were used to save Britain's ass in WWII? I guess the park itself isn't all that important but the things inside of it should be preserved in a museum somewhere.
      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    59. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by BytePusher · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that according to Godwin's law the discussion should end. I guess that is just how many have interpreted it and I was speaking against that interpretation. I think the fact that the world still talks about "the war," is an indication that we're still processing it's implications and discussions about it should be encouraged. This is especially true as new generations learn (or do not learn) about "the war."

    60. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      So when are you pulling the White house down ... we know what happened there it's very well documented?

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    61. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by JoeDuncan · · Score: 1

      Doing something great a long time ago shouldn't guarantee you a lifetime of financial benefits. Even if you saved the world. Agreed in principle. It is illogical to base current decisions on events that have occurred in the past, they are fixed.

      The only events which it is rational to consider in decision making are those which will occur in the future and can be predicted with a certain degree of probability.

      In this light, funding for the the Bletchley Park museum should not be justified based on it's previous accomplishments, but on the future benefit to society of preserving a record of those previous accomplishments. Such important historical events have a great deal to teach us and are of an immense value to future generations.
    62. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by JoeDuncan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And if you have the documentation the site becomes more about the emotional and symbolic attachment than historical value. Which is precisely the point.

      Human cognition is modulated by emotional processes, which are highly affected by symbolism. If we want the lessons learned from events like those at Bletchley Park to have societal significance in informing future generations, the emotional impact and symbolism of preserving the physical location is a huge benefit.

      Personally, I know that I recall historical lessons learned from actual visits to museums much better and more vividly than any list of dry facts I learned in history class. Psychological principles tell us that this is most likely the case with the majority of other people as well.

      The historical value is greatly enhanced by the "emotional and symbolic attachment" that you dismiss.
    63. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by photomonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll bite because you're obviously (AC) embarrassed by your own opinion.

      Many of those pictures you have hanging in your home and/or office exist BECAUSE of copyright. That music and video hogging space on your iPod... you know, the stuff that helps you make it through your workout? It's there precisely because of copyright.

      Sure, some aspects of copyright law have gotten out of control. But it is copyright that allows artists to fully pursue their art, and to make the work that you (or others) deem socially, culturally and personally important.

      --
      Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    64. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Wrong. I see the value, but if the cost is more than the value, then so be it.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    65. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by octover · · Score: 1

      There is tons of stuff from Native Americans around Utah and Colorado. Nine mile canyon in Utah contains petroglyphs from at least a 1000 years ago. Mesa Verde National Park has cliff dwellings that were used in around the 12th and 13th centuries. Those are just two examples that came to mind right away.

    66. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 2, Funny

      So when are you pulling the White house down ... we know what happened there it's very well documented?
      Correction: It was well documented, but we keep losing stuff.
      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    67. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually nobody should accept funding from the B&M Gates Fundation.

      But Bechtley park should definitivelly be transformed into a museum in memory of Alan Turing.

      Not only is it significant in relation to the second world war, but it is also significant in relation to the genius and personal tragedy of Alan Turing.

      M. Turing unfortunatelly for him had "illegal sexual orientations" (he was gay, and by the way no I'm not).
      Because of this he was condemned to chemical castration, and nobody came up to explain to the juge that he was condemning not some "coward hidden in an office that refused to do his duty", but the savior of millions.
      This ultimatelly led to his suicide.

      Bringing schoolschildren to present the dangers of the times, and the cruelty and tragedy stemming from bigottry and conformism of the time would be a reason to fund this place.

    68. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      That written, I view the demise of Bletchley Park the same way I look at copyrights: Doing something great a long time ago shouldn't guarantee you a lifetime of financial benefits. Even if you saved the world. When it comes to historical landmarks, I'm all in favor of saving the most important ones, even at public expense. I'm involved myself in some Civil War battlefield preservation efforts. That said, not every landmark deserves to be saved. Not every square inch of battlefield, nor ever house or building should be preserved forever in all cases.

      Bletchley was picked because the Brits thought it more likely that code breaking would stay secret longer if done in some old civilian houses instead of military facilities. It was the equivalent of the NSA setting up shop in your next door neighbor's house, and hiding all the activity within so that no one would suspect anything. After the war, wasn't all of that activity then moved elsewhere? So it's not like Bletchley has been the home of British code breaking all this time.

      The Bletchley houses are old and in need of repair, but many are quite lovely. I certainly wouldn't let a developer tear them down to put up monstrous post-modern architecture condos or anything, but really, let people live in those houses again. Just specify to developers what they can and can't do with those houses when renovating them. I don't know how it's done in Britain, but here in the States, we designate certain houses and buildings as historical landmarks while still allowing their sale and use to new parties. We just put certain limits on what the owners can do with that property. If those restrictions aren't agreeable, we don't let them buy the property. This is a reasonable compromise, and we do it all the time. My great aunt and uncle lived in an old plantation mansion in Alabama that was designated a historical landmark... there was a sign in their front yard placed by the state of Alabama giving a brief history of the place and acknowledging its landmark status. They were able to modernize certain things... plumbing, utilities, etc, as long as they didn't alter the essential character of the place. They found this a reasonable compromise, and I don't see why the same thing couldn't be done at Bletchley.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    69. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by greensnake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's chicken and egg. Only by the site persisting can people become educated as to its significance and then realize its worth. Those of you who take the self-sustaining stance are those who see the price of everything and the value of nothing. What's significant is what those people did, not where they did it. The Trust should sell the place for what they can get and use the money to fund math scholarships, etc.
    70. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      I've been to Casa Grande in Arizona, and Moundville in Alabama. Also, to another place with long squiggly mounds like giant snakes, somewhere in southern Ohio - I don't remember the name.

    71. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      But how can a Wookie live on Endor?!?!

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    72. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I thought they did all the tearing down 60-70 years ago, during that little scuffle called World War II.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    73. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      "And eventually it gets down to the fact that if we faithfully preserved every place that anything interesting had ever happened at it wouldn't be long before our entire society would be static."

      Slightly off topic, but this reminded me of the funny signs you used to see in the French Quarter and other historical sites in New Orleans. Often on someone's front gate would be a little plaque that said something like "On February 19, 1789 Napoleon pick his nose on this spot." So some of the more humorous, and less research inclined residents starting posting small brass "On this spot on May 15th 1857, absolutely nothing happened." plaques.

      Places like New Orleans do demonstrate that History can be preserved without the result being stagnation. Most big, old cities in both the US and Europe have found a compromise between moving forward and preserving history, perhaps compromise can be made here as well?

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    74. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Because without Bletchley, there would be no computers, and Bill Gates would probably be a failed lawyer working in his Dad's company

      Because any time you use a computer to process a string, you are using technology decended from the work done at Bletchley.

      Its not just the buildings, they have actual working rebuilds of WWII technology, and indeed many different types of computer that predate the PC. They have a fully working Ferranti Argus that was built to control a power station, in the 1960's and still works good as new! You can see the computer developing from WWII to the present day, and I certainly believe that is important that people in the future can see from working examples how computer technology developed, not least because in many respects it has gone backwards! (Obviously not in MIPS). How many of today's computers will have a single working example in 30 years?

      30 years ago, there were hundreds of different architecture, not just the five or so we have today. 50 years ago, computer architecture was on the saae scale as building architecture - machines weighed over 50 tons!

      If you want to know what computing was like before the PC, Bletchley IS the place to go and see it, because the prehistoric machines still run!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    75. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Those are some good examples. Although they pale in comparison to some of the more prolific relics of the old world. Was it a question of technology, or is there another reason that there seems to be a lack of permanent monuments from ancient tribes of north America.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    76. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by seandiggity · · Score: 1

      With an attitude like that, you may want to join PNAC.

      You realize most of the problems in Africa can be traced back to its colonization, don't you? And Africa is in the midst of a neo-colonial period right now? Also, have you seen Iraq lately?

      --
      Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
    77. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by jonbryce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But it is near Milton Keynes, and therefore impossible for anyone other than a local to find.

    78. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by ek_adam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the US we think 100 years is a long time.

      In England they think that 100 miles is a long way to drive.

    79. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      As a charity, it will be exempt from rates.

    80. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      Mexico is technically part of North America (and is certainly home to some impressive architecture), but I get your point. I've often wondered why the people living north of Mexico didn't build large, lasting settlements and buildings, but have never gotten around to researching it.

    81. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 3, Funny

      But in Nazi England, Poland invades YOU!

    82. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      When a comment like this is modded 'insightful', I get confused. How can we be sure that the modders were rating it on the basis of its irony?

    83. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by mi · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that sees value in preserving important parts of our history for future generations?

      There are only two options here:

      1. Either there are enough people like you to help this museum with their donations.
      2. Or there aren't enough people like you and the museum will close.

      The third way you'd like (and your current pro-Democrat sig is what makes me think so) is to tax everyone (whatever the rest of us think of this museum) and help this museum with those taxes. Fortunately, this approach is not an option in this case...

      And let me preempt any switch to my own persona by saying, that I did know about this place for a while, having read both a documentary account of American/British cryptanalysis during WW2 and Neal Stephenson's fiction on the subject.

      I do find BP fascinating, but I'm not sure, I would go to visit it in person on my visit to UK. There are place which one must see, BP is something one must read about...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    84. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by hughk · · Score: 1

      Bletchley was picked because the Brits thought it more likely that code breaking would stay secret longer if done in some old civilian houses instead of military facilities.
      Yes, they wanted out of town but many former manor houses were acquired by the government over the years and turned into research laboratories. Many of these laboratories have been privatised now, but although pay for British scientists working in pure research is crap, they sometimes have some beautiful locations to work in.
      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    85. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by VJ42 · · Score: 2, Funny

      But it is near Milton Keynes So that's why people aren't going there, they might have to see Milton Keynes in order to get there...
      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    86. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by hughk · · Score: 1

      Yes, in theory the Imperial War Museum could take on the crypto and the Science Museum could take on the computing. Unfortunately, neither have space, and frankly I was quite disappointed by the Science Museum where there are few good new exhibits.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    87. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by hughk · · Score: 1

      Good point. I have seen the computing exhibition at the Science Museum and it is rubbish (apart from the difference engine). Apart from the crypto stuff, a large part of the history of British computing is represented there.

      Yes, and the guy in the last picture is Tony Sale a former technical officer at MI5 who was given access to former BP Staff for the reconstruction. Essentially as the machines were broken up at the end of the war, he had to work from scraps of notes and very distant memories. He is fascinating to hear.

      The only issue is the place is not so easy to get to, either a journey up the M1 or fun with the wonderful British public transport system.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    88. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      That written, I view the demise of Bletchley Park the same way I look at copyrights: Doing something great a long time ago shouldn't guarantee you a lifetime of financial benefits. Even if you saved the world. Great you broke codes but a long time has passed since then. Figure out how to pay your own way. Perhaps you've been reading Slashdot too long and are starting to misapply (totally valid) arguments against the music industry elsewhere. Or perhaps you just view everything in terms of business.

      Whether Bletchley Park is worth preserving is, of course, open to discussion.

      Regardless, to consider the question as if the place were nothing more than a business looking for handouts after it had been paid back is blinkered.

      I don't know your nationality, but if (e.g.) the Statue of Liberty or the Alamo were to require more money than they were making, can you imagine even your average pro-business, anti-socialist American saying that they should pay their own way or be knocked down? Of course not- they're ******* historical monuments, and widely considered part of the shared history of the country. They're NOT sodding corporations!

      As I said, whether or not Bletchley Park is worth preserving and putting money into is a reasonable discussion. However, unless you strongly believe- and have reasonable evidence- that those running the place are doing so for their own benefit, then it's stupid to judge it as something it isn't supposed to be.
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    89. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by digitig · · Score: 1

      Is it a charity? I noticed it was a trust but couldn't see anything about it being charitable. That would make a difference. I note on the website that the entrance is now in Sherwood Drive, so the field with the navaids on would now be near the front, not at the back as I said.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    90. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The British Government... set up the National Lottery to directly tax poor and stupid people with a remit to help good causes such as this one."
      That's because they use the actual taxes to fund more worthy projects - invasion of foreign countries and MP's expenses, for instance.

    91. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      Insightful? Unfortunately I think this just a case of reader bias. Slashdot is not where you want to be posting articles about historical *anything*. Not since it was sacked by the high schoolers & wannabes (who failed history 'cause they were doing their math homework, of course).

      In case no one actually gets it, still: sometimes things have value that don't reside in RAM. Things like culture, and heritage. You can't get those on a torrent, you need to preserve them. Let the "free market" rules apply to actual markets. People are saying, "well, they don't make enough to keep the museum running, so probably it doesn't matter anyway."

      I guess you're right, it doesn't matter. But hey, let's put a mall there, right? Cause we're always a few short of those things. NOT EVERYTHING THAT HAS VALUE IS EASILY PRICED.

    92. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Inthewire · · Score: 1

      Nomads aren't known for architecture.

      --


      Writers imply. Readers infer.
    93. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in Dayton, Ohio, a group of dedicated people fought valiantly to save Building 26. Building 26 was where the Enigma code was broken in Dayton, led by Joseph Desch, a team of engineers,cryptographers and hundreds of WAVES. All these people designed and built the machine that is still top secret in the NSA. They then had to keep their secret unti the 1990's. A Catholic university (UD)recently tore down the re-usuable architect-designed brick building and there now stanmds an empty space with no divulged plans for redevelopment. Re-using and adding to meet the current needs of the college or commercial use would have saved millions AND we found a legitimate funder (albeit in the 10th hour). OH, and our tax dollars were being given to help them. History and conservation go hand-in-hand. What will we have to inspire future generations? Saving history does not negate functional use.

    94. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if they choose to, let them. Is it somehow up to philanthropical organizations outside of Britain to preserve this? It is not like this is some fledgling nation strapped for cash.

      Plus I think the "Brits" have plenty of heritage beyond this, covering a very long time period.

      And as far the Gates foundation only funding internet-based technology projects (the source article does state this), I have never heard of this before.

    95. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      First, Godwin's law doesn't exist

      You know who else would claim that? Hitler.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    96. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also did an NATS apprenticeship there, i remember returning a few years ago and being shocked at the decay, I tried to find my old room in D-Block, but the building was blatantly unsafe. Places like the old ATS clubroom reduced to a outline of foundations in the ground bought a tear to my eye.

      Tim.

    97. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      But it is near Milton Keynes, and therefore impossible for anyone other than a local to find.
      True. Unless you arrive by train.

      It's a shame the place is continuing to go downhill. I visited it back in 2003 when I was visiting the family in the area. (and yes, it took a while to find - I think we followed the railway line, but Dad was driving. He still gets lost in Milton Keynes, despite having lived in the area since the end of the War, decades before Milton Keynes was built.) Foundations crumbling ; wooden walls of the huts rotting, roofs leaking. Really sad to see.

      Unfortunately, there are only so many people who are interested in things like recent history, and that number seems to be too few.

      There's precious little chance of getting the trampling hordes of human bovines interested, unless we could get a display of <what's that thick footballer's name> and <the bony slapper with the over-inflated plastic tit's> used condoms in Hut 69, or something equally appealing to the intellect of the average moron on the M1.

      Which, in contrast to the opinions often expressed above, is the problem with supporting culture (and more specifically, the culture of science and technology) on a democratic basis. The set of {morons} and {disinterested} are in the majority.

      Part of the problem, I suppose, is that the people to whom places like Bletchley Park is likely to appeal are also the people likely to remember their single, solitary visit. so, relatively little market for repeat sales.
      But I do see they have a "Friends of ... " organisation, to which I'm just subscribing. Very strange that they don't have any online sign-up or donation service though ... oh, hang on, yes they do http://www.cafonline.org/apps/Charities/charitysearch.aspx?dsp_keywords=bletchley+park ; pity they can't make it a bit clearer. Any web designers in the MK area, they look like they could do with a bit of a hand on the layout front.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    98. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Prestwick · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you'd have the same view Telvin if it were the Nazi death camps at Auschwitz or Belsen which was being threatened by the bulldozers and property developers. The site is a link with Britain's wartime past, much like how the Imperial War Museum preserves the former RAF station at Duxford for the nation. Duxford was an important airfield in the Battle of Britain and is thus preserved as a link to Britain's past. You simply can't explain a site of such historical significance to future generations through a book, a television program or a 3D animation. The only way that you can get them to imagine how it must have been like in that period is if you took them to the place where it happened and showed them how it was done. The problem is that we're seeing the re-emergence of the movement who in the 1950s, 60s and 70s took especial delight in pulling down any building vaguely over 30 years old regardless of the historical significance. Look at London Euston Train terminus. The original was a one of a kind and a monument to Victorian engineering and now look at it. A huge concrete lump of the 1960s. But hey! Don't worry! We've got plenty of pictures of the old train terminus for bored kids to, y'know, not pay any attention to! Score!

    99. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gates is an overpaid hack and a socialist. He deserves all the criticism he gets and then some. Use Unix and avoid the slavery and viruses endemic to Windows!!

      Were it not for the men and women who worked in Bletchley Park, we'd all be speaking German or Japanese and living in slavery.

      Sincerely,

      Not a Coward

    100. Re:Why would they expect Gates Foundation funding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially when the main problem at Bletchley Park isn't lack of revenue prospects, but rather that it is run by an unaccountable Trust and dogged by a succession of rather poor management. This isn't some airfield in the back of beyond, it's a prime location next to Bletchley Station on the West Coast Mainline, close to the M1 and central to the Oxford/Cambridge corridor.

      As well as ever increasing gate revenues (up 40% this year), Bletchley Park also has a Weddings and Conferences business which charges premium prices for events in the Mansion and extensive parkland:
      Bletchley Park
      Rather ironically Microsoft and other big industry players pay thousands of pounds a time to rent out parts of the Park for conferences (or did until Greenish embarked on his latest campaign!).

      There is a commercial Innovation Centre, which provides a home to 27 companies who all pay rent that goes to the Trust to maintain the site. Real R&D once again goes on in Bletchley as witnessed by a recent visit by the Prime Minister to one of the tenants based in the wartime E-Block:
      Bletchley Park Innovation Centre
      Gordon Brown Visits Innovation Centre

      Both these income sources have flourished since they were contracted out and freed from the dead hand of day to day Trust management.

      Greenish's recent PR campaign just betrays the Trusts inept mindset. Comments about "decaying Bletchley Park" "having no future" will necessarily have a dramatic negative effect on Wedding, Conference and Innovation Centre revenues, damaging their own current income streams.
      The Trust management are instead far more interested in finding a massive source of funding that will free them from the requirement to operate in the real world.
      With a business plan like that, plus their unfortunate habit of slagging off prospective donors in every press release, it is hardly surprising that they seem to be having a bit of difficulty finding a sugar daddy.

  2. Upstairs boarder by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I's a kid growing up in Kansas, we used t' rent out the upper room to boarders at a reasonable price. This helpt us git our bills paid and gave us poor farmers some company on those long summer nights. Twasn't like we were usin' the upstairs room.

    Except for hubris, I don't see the real benefit in holding on to all that real estate if all they are going to do is slowly bleed to death. If they put the land to work for them, by renting it out as office space, they could probably make enough to keep a smaller museum running.

    But what do I know about those English? All I know is that when I go into the bathroom, I'm American. When I come out, I'm American again.

    1. Re:Upstairs boarder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      when I go into the bathroom, I'm American.

      You should see a doctor about that.

    2. Re:Upstairs boarder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      And when you're in the bathroom? European.

    3. Re:Upstairs boarder by WatersOfOblivion · · Score: 1

      I had a similar idea: Keep one (or two) building -the most historically significant of them- as a museum, and rent out/sell the rest with the stipulation that the actual buildings must remain intact. Remodeling's ok, but no tearing down anything. The site as a whole should be preserved, even if only part is an actual museum.

    4. Re:Upstairs boarder by Vectronic · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Nah, when he's in the bathroom, he's taking a shit, pissing, or picking his nose, which is universal and doesnt matter what country you are from...

    5. Re:Upstairs boarder by WinPimp2K · · Score: 0, Redundant

      whoosh!
      whoosh!
      whoosh!

      --

      You either believe in rational thought or you don't
    6. Re:Upstairs boarder by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're already doing that. Some of the estate has been sold off. Parts of the main building (the old mansion) can be hired for conferences etc. if I remember correctly.
      There's no hubris there, at least none that I could detect when I visited the place a few years ago.

    7. Re:Upstairs boarder by Captain+Hook · · Score: 1

      The thing about Bletchley Park is that it was really the system as a whole that was responsible for the code breaking not a single piece of equipment or a room

      The staff there were isolated from the surrounding villages to maintain secrecy and so the whole site really was integral to the process from a "The life of a code breaker" sort of story. It really wasn't a single room filled with a bunch a smart people who could have been moved at the drop of a hat.

      Think I'll have a visit to Bletchley Park, if only to give some money to them

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
  3. Barely scraping by? by RandoX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Even the "run down" pictures look better than my working conditions.

    1. Re:Barely scraping by? by kabocox · · Score: 1

      Even the "run down" pictures look better than my working conditions.

      Well, I took a look at the picture. My impression? Damn that would make a nice office or apartment. IF they can't make it as a museum, then on one wants to spend how ever much to look at WWII decrypting stuff. It was important so what. It isn't important right now or the British would fund it. I'm sure the British have a much newer code breaking office complex some where else that they actually consider important.

      Come on there were lots of offices that had "important" work done during WWII. It doesn't mean the average person will think that any given office complex should be made into a museum and pay admission to look at it though.

      I thought it would make a nice bed and breakfast. Maybe that's what your average British person thinks it is when passing by it? I mean unless you told me it was a museum; I wouldn't really guess it from the outside. Of course, I wouldn't guess that there were actual offices in there either.

      I'd say if the locals don't think its good enough to be museum, then the buildings need to be something else than a museum there. My small town supports two local museums that really the only time I ever went by either was grade school field trips. If our town can manage to keep its two little museums open, then I don't see why that local town can't do the same.

  4. The real problem by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 0, Troll
    This is the problem with anglo-saxon, bourgeois societies such as the UK and the US.

    Everything has a price tag. Everything costs something, and everyone should get something hard for everything he does.

    No wonder that those countries economies are circling down the drain: long-term viability is sacrificed to the short-term gain.

    It's no wonder that they so wantonly ignore their histories!!!!

    1. Re:The real problem by apodyopsis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      we wantonly ignore our history because we actually have lots and lots of it, mate.

      when you are tripping over history with every other step you take then you'll get pretty relaxed about it as well.

      having said that, it make me weep when a properly constructed 150+ year old house get ripped down for a cramped development of flats made from bricks, spit and twigs. it is precisely because of the sheer amount of historical relevance and interest that naturally some things get sacrificed, and once its gone then its gone for ever.

      face it, as a attraction Bletchley has to compete with central london only 25 miles away - and when you put it like that it will always lose.

    2. Re:The real problem by sqldr · · Score: 1

      Too right.. presently, the post office, a national service, is shutting down branches (and the communities surrounding them) because it's apparently "losing" 2 million a year.

      As a national service, it was never supposed to earn money in the first place. it doesn't "lose" 2 million, it COSTS 2 million. There is a difference that the British government and its advisors can't comprehend.

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    3. Re:The real problem by aproposofwhat · · Score: 1
      If Adam Crozier didn't insist on taking huge bonuses for running an underperforming operation (along with the rest of the monkeys on the board), the Post Office would actually turn a profit.

      --
      One swallow does not a fellatrix make
    4. Re:The real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Heck, I /left/ central London for a short train ride out to Bletchley (which is just across the street from the train station...take a RIGHT, learned the hard way). I read about Bletchely on here just before a trip over that way for work.

      It's nice to get out of the cramped city for an afternoon to walk around the old farm the Park sits on. The wife enjoyed it because of all the historical value. Hopefully they'll get the national computing museum running soon to draw more visitors.

      The volunteers that lead the tours are great and the place has more than a day's worth of cool stuff to peruse. Head on out if you get a chance. Really hope the place doesn't go under, but the pictures make it look more well-kept than it actually is. More renovation is needed.

      The most interesting thing during the tour: It's estimated that the work done at Bletchley Park shortened the length of the war by 18 months. If the war had run ~18 months longer, the target of the bomb would have been Berlin instead of Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

    5. Re:The real problem by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      The most interesting thing during the tour: It's estimated that the work done at Bletchley Park shortened the length of the war by 18 months. If the war had run ~18 months longer, the target of the bomb would have been Berlin instead of Hiroshima/Nagasaki. Something similar had occurred to me. I posted this comment a while back, which was essentially that- IMHO- Germany may have been lucky to have lost the war literally two months (three at a push) before the atomic bomb was ready. You can click the link if you like, so I'll avoid rehashing it here (note also some interesting responses to it).

      I do find it strange that- despite all the discussion about use of the atomic bomb on Japan- people seem to forget that the weapon was developed primarily in response to Germany, and all that implies.

      IMHO the war would *not* have gone on a further 18 months, because the atomic bomb would have been used against Germany long before then to force it to a conclusion.
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    6. Re:The real problem by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      This is the problem with anglo-saxon, bourgeois societies such as the UK and the US.

      Everything has a price tag. Everything costs something, and everyone should get something hard for everything he does.

      No wonder that those countries economies are circling down the drain: long-term viability is sacrificed to the short-term gain.

      It's no wonder that they so wantonly ignore their histories!!!!

      (Reposted, account being "moderated" as "troll")

  5. I say, I say , I say ... by ThirdPrize · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    My dog has no nose.

    --
    I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
    1. Re:I say, I say , I say ... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      How does he smell?

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:I say, I say , I say ... by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1

      Terrible!

    3. Re:I say, I say , I say ... by ThirdPrize · · Score: 1

      Boom, boom!

      --
      I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
  6. The wars over so go home already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been nearly 50 years already so let it go !! Blimey !!

  7. The British did not break Enigma by jotok · · Score: 5, Informative

    Enigma was broken by a Polish cryptographer named Marian Rejewski. The Poles knew they were going to be overrun by the Germans and disclosed their work to the French and British.

    Bletchley Park is where they automated the process of intercepting, decrypting, translating, and analyzing Axis communications. I can't think of any large-scale SIGINT operation that preceded Bletchley, and it was certainly vital to the war effort, but credit where it's due, etc.

    1. Re:The British did not break Enigma by maxume · · Score: 5, Informative

      Great article on the history of Enigma:

      http://www.nsa.gov/publications/publi00016.cfm

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Alan Turing Biography shows a good sight into what went on here. It's a painful read at times (more notably the childhood years) but there's certainly some interesting stuff in there.

    3. Re:The British did not break Enigma by N+Monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      Enigma was broken by a Polish cryptographer named Marian Rejewski. IIRC, enigma was initially broken as you say, but that technique relied on the German army's flawed protocol of sending two encrypted copies of the same 3 letters (that formed the session key) at the start of each transmission. They soon realised that this was a security weakness and so Bletchley park had to develop new techniques. The German navy used a much tougher system again.

    4. Re:The British did not break Enigma by chakmol · · Score: 1

      Enigma was broken by a Polish cryptographer named Marian Rejewski. The Poles knew they were going to be overrun by the Germans and disclosed their work to the French and British.

      Bletchley Park is where they automated the process of intercepting, decrypting, translating, and analyzing Axis communications. I can't think of any large-scale SIGINT operation that preceded Bletchley, and it was certainly vital to the war effort, but credit where it's due, etc.

      Buried deep within the article, there's some credit there:
      http://resources.zdnet.co.uk/articles/imagegallery/0,1000002003,39415278-20,00.htm

      I was glad to see you mention Marian Rejewski or I wouldn't have known to scan the article for it.
    5. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the polish broke an early version of enigma, they're work was a basis for later decyption of naval enigma (after the fourth wheel was added)

      Naval enigma was cracked in cases where the germans accidentally weakened the cipher by sending predictable messages with their short weather code system or using predictable openings to messages. These codes changed daily so the cryptanalysis had to be repeated, cracking a predictable message so the codes could be used on other messages

      Then there was the 'first' computer - the coloussus developed at bletchley to brute force enigma

      And there was also the invention of traffic analysis, where intelligence was derived by watching the propagation of messages through the german communication network even though the content of the messages was unknown

      Given these contributions to our history surely it's worth preserving !

    6. Re:The British did not break Enigma by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the most significant act of the Polish cryptographers was proving that the code could be broken. Without that, it's possible that the British government would have directed the resources elsewhere.

    7. Re:The British did not break Enigma by jopsen · · Score: 1

      As far as I remember the Polish only broke an early version of the enigma... But I guess it's a long and complex story... But yes, the Polish guys doesn't always get the credit they deserve...

    8. Re:The British did not break Enigma by jrumney · · Score: 1

      I think there is a replica of Colossus in the Science Museum in London, or maybe I'm confusing it with Babbage's differencing engine as it's about 8 years since I visited. There's no good reason why the equipment has to be preserved in an out of the way place in such a narrow interest facility as Bletchley Park.

    9. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the Polish broke initial Enigma designs, passed through the French, on to the British. That said, the British did keep the effort alive and continued to crack modifications to Enigma (extra rotors, reflector disk, etc.).

      The British did a hell of a lot more than automate the process.

    10. Re:The British did not break Enigma by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      Enigma was indeed broken by the poles in 1932 through the use of german sloppy procedures ( giving known cribs), and their work caused the inital breaks of enigma - full credit to them. The automation was british, as was the day-to-day testing of the cribs and proposed solutions from the bombes during the war. The naval introduction of a 4th rotor to enigma caused a shut-out of bletchley for 10 months before they found another way 'in' (the short weather reports were sent using only three rotors, thus allowing the existing bombes to work on the cribs from the weather and short signal books)

      Enigma was the field unit cipher system.

      Lorenz was the german headquarters and fixed station cipher system for teleprinters, with high-level communications. That was broken by the use of Colossus, the first programmable digital, electronic, computing device in december 1943, again at Bletchley.

      The poles did the initial crucial work on enigma, Bletchley broke many new versions of engima and lorenz and carried the load of allied decryption for years, with the americans stepping in near the end of the war with a much bigger budget and faster machines.

      However you slice it, the intel work at Bletchley was crucial for the war effort - it's often estimated to have shortened the war by at least two years, and saved many allied ships.

      That the British government appears happy to let it and the rebuilt equipment fade away is disgusting.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    11. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bletchley cracked several other codes, such as the collective Fish set, and also re-cracked them as the German OKW changed settings and procedures.

      To say they 'automated' it is to say they made the very first efforts to do so - much of the work was still pen-and-paper exercises with cribs and fragments. Colossus, for example, was only to automate the setting of chi and phi wheel settings of the German equipment.

      "Allied efforts to break the German Enigma code" isn't a claim that Britain was solely responsible for breaking Enigma. But you will find that many Allied cryptographers and mathematicians - including Poles - worked at Bletchley.

      TFOAE

    12. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      That was indeed the difference engine at the Science Museum.

      Which reminds me, I should head down there some evening. I've not been since I moved to London.

    13. Re:The British did not break Enigma by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The Naval Enigma used an extra rotor, and had a far more complicated encrypting procedure, making the breaking of it far more difficult than the already-daunting task of breaking the 3-rotor Enigma.

    14. Re:The British did not break Enigma by piotru · · Score: 2, Informative

      -First, Rejewski and coworkers from Biuro Szyfrow in Poland had shown that Enigma IS breakable. Before nobody bothered attacking the problem.
      -Second, the Polish have for the first time ever applied mathematics to decrypting.
      -Third, they have developed "Bomba", the first ever decrypting machine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomba_(cryptography))

      For more details, read Simon Singh's "The Code Book"

    15. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, there's a *working* replica of Colossus at Bletchley Park - it's been constructed by enthusiasts over the course of the last decade or so.
      (I'm not actually sure if it's total replica, or whether it uses some original parts).

      There are a number of museums on the site; there's this, there's a large museum of the history of computing, there's a museum of cinema projection (no, I don't know why), and a few other bits. There's also a lot of empty space. Perhaps they need to sell off a bit of the site...

    16. Re:The British did not break Enigma by muzicman · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that America won the war all on their own.... FYI the British DID crack the Enigma code. I am not as Naive so as to believe it was done without the work of other nationality's but it was Alan Turing that developed the method of finding the settings for the Enigma machine. Enabling the deciphering of the Enigma code. Hence the person most responsible was British.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flamebait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    17. Re:The British did not break Enigma by maxume · · Score: 1

      Are you replying to this post:

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=555186&cid=23432200

      If so, what does your reply have to do with that article? If you bother to read it, you will see that there is a section that extensively covers the development of the British Bombes(Turing, Welchman and Keen apparently deserve a great deal of credit).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    18. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

      Enigma was broken by a Polish cryptographer named Marian Rejewski. The Poles knew they were going to be overrun by the Germans and disclosed their work to the French and British.
      Poles: Taking English jobs since 1932.
    19. Re:The British did not break Enigma by jotok · · Score: 1

      Rejewski did get help from other "nationalities": He got help from the French. At this time Turing was still an undergrad. I don't think he focused professionally on cryptanalysis until the late 30s when he started working for the British government.

    20. Re:The British did not break Enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So im guessing that you wanted to "go postal" when the Americans, yet again, took the truth and took to it with a blunt butcher knife, and gave us the biggest load of post war Bullshit that was u-571.

  8. Save Bletchley? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is odd timing for me, I'm planning a trip to England and Italy at the beginning of 2010. When asked what I wanted to see in England all I could come up with is the working difference engine (I can't remember what museum it's in off the top of my head) and Bletchley Park.

    This is something that I think could be saved by community donations. savebletchly.org is still available.

    But then again I'm a little surprised that savemarsrovers.org still isn't taken.

    I'm not voulenteering for either of these because I have zero experience in non-profits and just don't have the time.

    1. Re:Save Bletchley? by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      The Science Museum.

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    2. Re:Save Bletchley? by Curmudgeonlyoldbloke · · Score: 1

      savebletchly.org is still available. What about the correct spelling?
    3. Re:Save Bletchley? by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      I'm planning a trip to England and Italy at the beginning of 2010. When asked what I wanted to see in England all I could come up with is the working difference engine (I can't remember what museum it's in off the top of my head) and Bletchley Park.

      I believe it's in the Science Museum in London. Excellent place to visit. While you're in London pay a visit also to the British Museum, full of all the ancient statuary, relics, and important cultural artefacts that we plundered over the century or two in which we ruled the world - iconic figures of every civilisation there's ever been. In all honesty I wasn't so impressed by the Elgin Marbles, but the gods of the Assyrians they have there are magnificent.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  9. Misunderstanding by InvisblePinkUnicorn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Everything has a price tag. Everything costs something, and everyone should get something hard for everything he does."

    This only makes sense if you ignore why we use money. Money is simply an exchange of productivity. I work, get money, and then use that money to buy others' productivity. Saying "everything has a price tag" simply means that people are only willing to offer up their productivity if they get someone else's in return. That's the sign of a properly functioning market. If you want to donate to these causes, feel free, but don't demand the government forcibly take a larger portion of everyone's productivity (in the form of increased taxes) because you have a pet idea and you want easy access to money.

    1. Re:Misunderstanding by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1

      a pet idea

      Oh man, that gives me a great product idea. Thanks!

  10. Lottery funding by kernowyon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ok, so I can (sort of) understand the Gates Foundation not wishing to fund this, but the UK National Lottery turned it down too!
    For the benefit of those not in the UK, the National Lottery is where you buy a ticket for £1 and choose six numbers. If the numbers you pick come up - then you win a load of cash.
    This Lottery was supposed to raise money for what are deemed "Good Causes". These Good Causes are chosen by some committee who seem to have a strange idea with regard to what constitutes a "good cause". Running an elitist venue such as the Royal Opera House and maybe your clientele is dwindling because your prices are bloody ridiculous? Lottery funding to the rescue! There are plenty of examples of this "Old Boy" network, where obscure or unpopular elitist "causes" are funded, whilst small local projects - or indeed projects of National Historical value, such as Bletchley Park, are turned down.
    Only a very small percentage of the takings from the Lottery actually makes its way to the causes - the vast majority goes to the company which runs the Lottery. That is one of my biggest complaints about it - Richard Branson has offered on at least two occasions to run the Lottery and to make it a non-profit organisation, but has been turned down on both occasions, despite having the backing of most of the UK!
    I am not familiar with how Bletchley is currently funded - presumably by entrance fees? - but I would expect the UK Government to help out, rather than see this go under.

    --
    Awful UID - but I have been here ages...
    1. Re:Lottery funding by trongey · · Score: 3, Funny

      For the benefit of those not in the UK, the National Lottery is where you buy a ticket for £1 and choose six numbers. If the numbers you pick come up - then you win a load of cash... Apparently, you don't even have to buy the ticket. I get notified at least once a week that I've won the UK National Lottery. I just haven't gotten around to responding to those emails yet to claim my cash.
      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    2. Re:Lottery funding by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Funny

      For the benefit of those not in the UK, the National Lottery is where you buy a ticket for £1 and choose six numbers. If the numbers you pick come up - then you win a load of cash.

      We have two organizations like this in the US:

      The first is called Powerball - runs in many (not all states), and does almost the same thing... only costs a buck and a hope. The profits are divided among participating states and put towards public works projects (e.g. roads, schools, parks...)

      The other one is called NASDAQ, though Lord only knows where the profits end up.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    3. Re:Lottery funding by l-ascorbic · · Score: 1

      Well, actually Camelot takes far less than is given to the "good causes". But the point about Camelot being shitty still stands.

    4. Re:Lottery funding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After reading that the National Lottery turned them down I am NEVER buying a ticket again! They can give billions to the London 2012 Olympic cause but nothing to this. Fuck you National Lottery!

    5. Re:Lottery funding by owlnation · · Score: 1

      If you've ever tried to get funding from the Lottery Fund you'll also find out that if you face doesn't fit, you'll not be getting the money.

      Like most everything in the UK government, NGO's or Quangos, the Lottery fund is run by petty bureaucrats who have no sense of creativity, substance, heritage, or in fact anything else. Like most bureaucrats, they are bureaucrats because they've no imagination, nor ambition, nor skills. And the bad news is that they've also sucked up a lot of finds from The Arts Council and a few other organisations (whom, admittedly, were just as corrupt, nepotistic and ineffectual).

      If you are good at filling in forms and using the correct NeuesLabourRegime-socio-buzz-codewords on your grant application, and you are a freemason, and have a brother in local government, or are in some way related to Premier Gordon Brownshirt, you'll get on just fine.

      ...and if you don't the best way of getting lottery funding is to pay a pound and fill in the 6 numbers every week.

      The UK Lottery = Government Stupidity Tax.

    6. Re:Lottery funding by Pembers · · Score: 1

      I agree that the committee's ideas about what to fund seem strange sometimes, though the "strange" Good Causes will get more media attention than the "normal" ones. Most of the money paid into the lottery goes straight back out to those who buy tickets, in the form of prizes.

      The money spent on tickets is distributed as follows:

      • 50% in prizes
      • 28% to Good Causes
      • 12% to the Government in "lottery duty"
      • 5% to the retailers who sell the tickets
      • 4.5% covers Camelot's operating costs
      • 0.5% is Camelot's profit

      (From http://www.camelotfoundation.org.uk/camelot.asp )

      28% isn't exactly a very small percentage. Though who knows - maybe the Government's 12% should go to the Good Causes fund too. Maybe Branson could run it more efficiently than Camelot, but if the Government won't give up its share, a Branson-run lottery would give between 28% and 33% of the sales to good causes. That doesn't sound like so much of an improvement to me. And that's assuming ticket sales don't go down when he takes over.

  11. A symbol of Freedom is biting the dust, by pcfixup4ua · · Score: 0, Troll
    One guy named Andrew Meridith posted as a reply there

    I guess President Brown et cronies won't be chipping in either, as the excellent Bletchley Park Museum is a reminder of the miracles performed there during the war to defend the freedoms they're now systematically stomping all over.
    I think it is not suprising that as we descend into fascism, that the symbols of freedom are decaying.
    1. Re:A symbol of Freedom is biting the dust, by Huntr · · Score: 1

      That is an excellent observation. I wish I had mod points to give you right now.

    2. Re:A symbol of Freedom is biting the dust, by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      Unlucky looks like a Brown lover beat you too it.

  12. If you read TFA by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 4, Informative

    Make sure you go through the pictures as well, each one has a long and interesting caption.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  13. Who cares ? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is not some unique work of art or architecture. What was invented there (computer science) is what is really important and it is very alive in a lot of places today. The place where it all happened is just a footnote in history (and as some other posters will probably explain, Bletchley Park was only an important step in the coputer science history but is included in a continuity)

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    1. Re:Who cares ? by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bletchley should be preserved, because so much that is important to technology today happened within those walls. Alan Turing worked there. The German domination of the North Atlantic was broken there.

      It's hard for us in the US to imagine what the Brits went through during the war. Bletchley, along with the Battle of Britain, was one of their big successes on the home front.

      It's all well and good to read about history, but there's something more gripping about a visit to where history was made.

    2. Re:Who cares ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Folks here didn't care when UD pulled down the old NCR building where America's answer to Bletchley Park was, and they didn't care when NCR sold Sugar Camp where those first programmers stayed. So why are you so worked up about this? :( Seriously, they all ought to have been saved and Bletchley Park too. In fifty years, people will be making shocked noises about those Philistines in the early 21st century. But this society is full of short term thinkers.

    3. Re:Who cares ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bletchley Park was only an important step in the coputer science history But not the part that invented the spell-checker
    4. Re:Who cares ? by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      The point about the Museum is not the build but what is there and who is there ...

      There is a lot of exhibits and a reconstruction of Colossus (arguably the world first electronic computer) and more importantly some of the people who worked there, and a lot of people who know their stuff .. moving the exhibits somewhere else would save them but you would lose the people and you would lose the sense of place, there is a lot in the statement "and it happened right here"

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  14. "Hungry land developers are circling." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The developers being referred to in the article are from before WW2, not a current issue !

    1. Re:"Hungry land developers are circling." by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 3, Informative

      From page 6:

      Milton Keynes Council declared the site a conservation area in February 1992 and the landowners â" the government's land agency and BT â" withdrew all planning applications. Seven years later, former Bletchley Park Trust director Christine Large landed a deal with certain developers to secure the future of Bletchley Park in the hands of the Trust.

      But some developers remain far from dissuaded, recently winning the right to build houses even closer to the wartime facilities. One of the site's exhibition facilities now rests just 10 yards from 21st-century residential properties.

      With giant concrete mixers towering over the edge of the Trust's land, Greenish said he feels the remaining green space between Bletchley Park and surrounding surburbia may be lost, though he plans to fight the advance tooth and nail.

      Jonah HEX

  15. windows by dwater · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the Gates' would be interested if they ported Windows to the Enigma machine, or, at the very least, develop a Enigma simulator for Windows.

    --
    Max.
    1. Re:windows by simong · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is one. It looks a lot prettier now than the original version I saw in the mid 90s, but the principles are the same.

  16. why keep it? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    We should keep part of it in a museum, but it doesn't really keep up with today's standards of technology, so why keep it.....other then nostalgic reasons, it really is more of a drain then an advantage, are we ever going to use it again to break codes that a clustered computer came up with, no!....break it up , sell the property, keep whatever is necessary in museums, and let bygones be bygones

    1. Re:why keep it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly - just like Shakespeare's Globe Theatre in London, for example. It doesn't keep up with today's standards of drama (no special effects, no CGI, and the guy couldn't even spell properly) and sucks up millions in funding from the National Lottery and elsewhere. Are we ever going to need it again to perform new plays? No! That's what Hollywood's for. So let's knock it down and let bygones be bygones.

    2. Re:why keep it? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      Exactly....urr wait....apples and oranges???

  17. This is truly sad by Joshua+W+Ferguson · · Score: 5, Informative

    The work that the code breakers at Bletchley park did prevented a lot of Ally deaths. When the Germans instituted using the 4-wheel enigma it was impossible to tell what the U-boats were doing out in the Atlantic Ocean. Because of this, supply boats going to the U.K. were being sunk at a high rate, unable to avoid the U-boats, eventually the Brits could have been forced out of the battle (no war supplies == no war). Near the end of 1942 however, some documented daily settings on the new 4-wheel enigma were pulled off of a sunken U-boat in the Mediterranean allowing german naval deciphers to be broken. Through the man-power, knowledge, and tools available at Bletchley, they could decipher and relay german naval messages (at least in the Atlantic) to high command often within hours of obtaining them. After this, supply ships in the Atlantic were nearly invisible to German U-boats. The monthly settings booklets still had to be retrieved to continue this, but through missions and sometimes luck most of them were captured

    That's the WWII side of the story (or at least a very small part of it).

    The importance to /. is probably that this war was the first time machines were used to cipher messages, and thus machines had to do the deciphering. To break the regular ground enigma's daily settings scientists at Bletchley designed and manufactured the Colossus(es). If you ever see this thing run, especially the interior mechanisms, you'll know this was a great unknown leap towards multi-purpose computing machinery. Unfortunately because of U.K. laws, the work and knowledge of those at Bletchley couldn't be released until sometime in the 80's (I think)

    1. Re:This is truly sad by dave420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention the centimetric radar fitted to some of the first ASW planes ever put in action, but most definitely - Bletchley park changed the world.

    2. Re:This is truly sad by hughk · · Score: 1

      The story came out in the mid seventies. There is a reason for it which you see at the exhibition. Some Soviet devices were based loosely on technology from the Lorenz devices and they were being used through to 79 in Warsaw Pact countries. Yes, decryption had moved to much better equipment but some of the basic ideas remained.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  18. Disgusted by segedunum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a UK citizen I'm pretty disgusted that a lot of our landmarks and history, as well as worthwhile projects such as revived steam railway lines and 'sense' centres for severely disabled kids with people putting their own volunteer time in, are somehow getting turn down for National Lottery funding (there never is a solid reason given) and billions are being given to the waste of time and money that is the Olympics, largely because of corruption. Who's going to miss a few million going missing here and there? These are schemes and projects that only want a few tens or hundreds of thousands pounds as well.

    This is exactly the sort of thing that the National Lottery was supposed to help, and exactly the sort of thing that has been let down.

    1. Re:Disgusted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At some point you have to prioritize- I agree that there are certainly some things that should be treasured and protected, but I feel that those things should be truly important things.

      WWII was over 50 years ago. It was an important event in history, but if the site can't generate enough interest to pay its own bills, perhaps its time to take some of the more important artifacts/exhibits and move them into a more consolidated museum.

      I look at NYC (where I live) as an example of overzealous "preservation." For example, there is a "cast iron" district in Soho that is protected, and you can't tear those buildings down or renovate them without severe intrusion by the preservation board. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I look at those buildings and see a bunch of run down, grimy, functionally obsolete buildings that. But they will stay, and now an old industrial district is being shoe-horned as a residential district. NYC is a dynamic city, and it should be allowed to prosper and evolve, not be constrained by nostalgia.

  19. Never mind by Wowsers · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't worry, the pathetic English hating UK government will spare no effort in wasting £17bn on an 2 week politicians / IOC orgy at the London Olympics games that only the freeloaders want (as opposed to the taxpayers who don't want it).

    The things that are important to a nation are discarded, and what gives no benefit gets taxpayers money thrown at it like taxpayers money was going out of fashion.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
    1. Re:Never mind by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

      So which English tabloid do you work for, because I'd love to meet one of those Page 3 girls...

  20. No exaggeration by hcdejong · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was there a few years ago. Some of the exhibits were in WW2 vintage barracks (i.e. temporary buildings never meant to stand for more than 5 years, let alone 50. In one hut, there were puddles on the floor. The whole place is falling apart.

    As for the argument 'you can always move the exhibits to the Science Museum and sell the land': The exhibits are important, but the accomodations themselves make a point that's worth remembering as well. The most vital project of the entire war was being run out of a collection of sheds, basically. To think that 9000 people worked there on the most advanced technology in existence back then, boggles the mind.

  21. The irony. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That the foundation setup by the man once made the richest in the world by the computing industry, declines to fund the museum documenting the crucible of the first programmable computing machines, such as Colossus.

    Ingrates.

    TFOAE

    1. Re:The irony. by Locutus · · Score: 1

      that foundation's actions has shown that it is designed to promote Microsoft technology. Bletchley Park's website looks like it runs *nix/apache and ruby-rails since sometime after 2004. Without much Microsoft Windows there, why would that foundation support them? Remember, the purpose is to promote and extend Windows everywhere and their contracts with schools and libraries restricting OSS shows this. There is no irony here IMO.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  22. Misguided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation turned them down for financial assistance (since it doesn't have to do with the Internet)"

    So Bill, there's no encryption used on the internet & no Microsoft programmer has ever used it to secure Microsoft systems (albeit poorly)?

  23. Turn it into a Historic bldg or Museum by failedlogic · · Score: 4, Informative

    Now perhaps I'm over-associating the Bletchley work. But I'd have to think, that at the very least, this is a "Good Cause" to support. But I believe a museum designation is long-overdue for Bletchley - or a Heritage building which must be preserved. A statue of some of the fine men and women who worked there might draw people's attention to their efforts. I think its because the people at Bletchley weren't soldiers that they haven't garnered public attention or praise which is why Bletchley remains in the condition its in. Its a sad reality when the artsy fartsies are the first one to always get new museums or funding for museums. And indeed, they're the ones who fight for buildings to be preserved for Historic reasons. Where are they in this case? These would have been the last people to pickup a rifle in WWII.

    Members of the public probably don't know or understand (e.g. lack of knowledge of the military) the contributions at Bletchley. I'm not one to usually fight for heritage properties or a museum. But for goodness sake, the worked they did helped destroy countless U-boats (my Canadian grandfather worked on shipping lines crossing the Atlantic risking his neck each time he crossed and so many perished because of the U-Boats), helped gather countless intel on German operations, helped confirm the D-Day operation date and continued to spy on the Germans (just to make sure they weren't up to anything) after WWII. It saved the lives of countless Army, Air and Navy men and women of all nationalities that served in WWII on the European front. And, indirectly, because of this work, it helped put a stop to the Concentration Camps.

    Why the hell are they not getting the due respect and attention that they so rightly desire? This is a disgrace. Were I British, I would be fighting for the preservation of this building. I'm not sure that as a Canadian, my words will count for much.

  24. Engima by Jonah+Hex · · Score: 0

    Anyone else immediately recognize the Enigma machine from the thumbnail while going through the article? I don't know whether to feel well educated or just old at 36. ;)

    Jonah HEX

  25. Bilinda aren't the right people by simong · · Score: 0, Redundant

    They should have approached Nathan Myhrvold. He's got a Difference Engine now, I bet he'd love a Colossus.

  26. Build a real testament-- teach kids crypto by samuel4242 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    These are just mouldering old buildings. Do we set aside some corner of London because someone famous did something there a long time ago? No. We move on and build newer better things. A better solution is to build a living museum by creating courses that teach kids how to build strong cryptographic tools. This will protect British business and help the average Brit defend themselves against fraudsters roaming the net. I think one classroom with free classes could do more to memorialize the spirit of Bletchley Park than a bunch of old buildings filled with dusty display cases.

    1. Re:Build a real testament-- teach kids crypto by augustw · · Score: 1

      Bletchley isn't "some corner of London" - it's in Milton Keynes, over 4o miles from London. And Bletchley Park isn't filled with "dusty display cases" - it's home to a rebuild of the original Colossus, as well as several complete early British mainframes, and other, more modern, working historical computers.

  27. Advertising by owtsbetterthennowt · · Score: 2, Informative

    They might try advertising to increase the number of visitors. I live less then 30 miles from the site and have never once seen any promotional material relating to it.

    1. Re:Advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you expect? This was meant to be a TOP SECRET installation....

  28. Hard to Visit by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The few times I've been to the UK in recent times I've tried to visit Bletchley Park. Each time, the hours of the museum didn't work. In checking the website, I now see that things have improved considerably, but with an infant at home I likely won't be back to the UK any time soon :(

  29. What should be done? by perlwannabe · · Score: 2, Funny

    That is a question wrapped in a puzzle wrapped in an enigma.

  30. I've been there by thermian · · Score: 1

    Actually, the entire interesting portion of the museum could fit in a single room of, say, the Science Museum in London.

    They also have a bunch of rather nice, second world war cars, but these are out of place in the museum, and mostly not apparent unless you really hunt around.

    There may be a lot of interesting history regarding the site, but it has no chance of getting widespread public interest.

    The reason is the same as that for the various Watermill restoration projects around the country (to pick an example of similer behaviour). It's designed to appeal to the people who work there, not to the public.

    The walkthrough exhibits are cluttered, looking more like a succession of period junk shops, the code breaking huts look like crap, again poorly presented with little to make you want to look around, and the main building is, well, just a large empty house with a few signs up.

    If they sell the site, the main house would be left untouched, it's a listed building. The huts? Well they may be protected, but I doubt it. More likely they'd be better off being dismantled and reassembled as a properly themed exhibit in a decent museum.

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    1. Re:I've been there by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, the huts are also protected.

      Of course, what usually happens in these circumstances is that they mysteriously burn down and are damaged beyond repair.

    2. Re:I've been there by thermian · · Score: 1

      Read the article? For shame...

      Still, that's nice to know. Personally I think it would be better if they got someone in who actually understood how to properly present such things so as to interest the current generation.

      I was particularly annoyed about their state of repair and poor presentation because to be honest they were the only thing I was interested in.
      When I went there the computer history collection (or whatever it's called) was housed there. That turned out to be the most interesting part of my day.
      They actually had an Einstein. You don't know how much I wanted one of those...

      Oh dear, I just showed how old I am.

      --
      A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
  31. renting out chunks of Bletchley Park by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Well in the last few years they've sold off a lot of the land they previously owned (modern housing estate being built there now) and you can indeed rent out some of the buildings, plus they rent the main areas out as function rooms.

    Trouble is the UK is on the edge of a recession - you might have noticed housing prices being a bit dodgy in the USA recently? and so the office rental market is shrinking not growing. So it's a tough market to be in and 60 year old buildings in Bletchley, well, that's a tough sell compared to high tech office in central London (or even central Milton Keynes).

  32. Serves them right. God hates fags. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alan Mathison Turing worked there and he was a homosexual.

    1. Re:Serves them right. God hates fags. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about god, but maybe people giving to charity don't like them.

    2. Re:Serves them right. God hates fags. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >Alan Mathison Turing worked there and he was a homosexual.

      Don't ask, don't tell.

      --
      Evil people are out to get you.
  33. Too much land for what it holds by Animats · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been to Bletchley Park. The problem is that they have only a few things worth exhibiting, like the rebuilt bombe, the rebuilt Colossus, and some real crypto machines from WWII. One big gallery in a major museum could house the collection. But the place is a sizable estate. The famous "huts" aren't much to look at, and some of them are only concrete pads today. The manor house is in decent shape but an architectural mishmash not really worthy of preservation.

    They also have a model railroad, a model boat club, an auto collection, a lake with swans, a collection of Churchill-was-here memorabilia, and, inevitably, a gift shop, like too many other English estates open to visitors.

  34. The meaning when is isn't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bletchley Park, the home of Station X, Britain's secret code-breaking base during World War II, barely scraping by financially, as shown in these images compiled by ZDNet this week. This sentence no verb.
  35. calling us out by spazdor · · Score: 1

    Okay everyone, be honest.

    How many of us only know or care about this because we really liked Cryptonomicon?

    --
    DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
  36. not serious enough for B&M Gates froundation by Locutus · · Score: 1

    you know, if Bletchley Park was serious about getting funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, they would have put the Microsoft Windows logo on the building. And it really would have helped if they switched their server back to Windows/IIS/ASP instead of *nix/apache/rubyrails.

    They must not have wanted Bill's money THAT badly. ;-)

    They could also have offered to accept a couple of million to replace the website with MS Sliverlight. That would have been more likely to open the coffers of the B&MG foundation. IMO.

    Kidding aside, Bletchley Park is an important part of the worlds history and should be preserved.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  37. "Hungry land developers are circling" by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 1
    No they're not.

    Land developers are invariable well fed, and they drive large vehicles whose handling is so bad that turning at a constant radius of curvature is impossible.

    Seriously though, this should be part of the Imperial War Museum.

    --
    Squirrel!
  38. I wouldn't worry too much about land developers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The foundation has a 250 year lease on the lands. So, unless some shrewd developer has found a way of time traveling or getting paid to develop at some point in the far future (2250), there is nothing to worry about in the short term. Who knows maybe over the next 100 years or so, they can convince the government to take it over. However, England does have a lot of history, are you contending that they should preserve every place where something important happened over the last 2000 years? Maybe they should kick everyone out and turn the entire country into a museum? Or, maybe they could find a way of incorporating the important history but without using up all the available land mass in England. England after all doesn't have quite the same amount of land as the US, which can afford to have lots and lots of little bitty rinky-dink museums. That said, the museum doesn't seem to be suffering too, much for one that is only 8 years old. The lease was made in 2000, so this is a relativley new place and the poster is probably just trying to generate interest in it, to hopefully get more sponsors, etc. Something I would do, were I hired to try to promote some useful NPO. Although, attacking the B & M Gates foundation is a bad way of doing it. They do a lot of good work. I love to Bash Bill as much as the next guy, but this was out of line even for /. standards.

  39. No love for a computer museum on /.? by seandiggity · · Score: 1

    Lots of hate for Bletchley Park in these comments, surprisingly. Does anyone on /. think there's no value in museums or parks or art galleries? Should we stop funding them because people are starving? Maybe if we took a serious look at the problem of poverty instead of relying upon the Gates's and Rockefellers of the world (who are part of the problem), we'd be able to feed people and preserve culture.

    For those that would label me as not pragmatic enough, I'd say take a look at the bloated military budget of the U.S. or U.K. Even a thin little wafer of the pie chart could preserve many Bletchley Parks. And potentially save lives, I'd add (by diverting funds from a war machine and putting them into social spending).

    --
    Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
    1. Re:No love for a computer museum on /.? by seriesrover · · Score: 1

      I agree on your sentiment...we will eventually regret any choice to let it fall into ruin. The things we look at in the last few years might seem old and tacky but they are a part of history and will, more often than not, become a national treasure.

  40. Simple idea to preserve Bletchley Park... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sell it to the Americans.

    There is always one American with more money than sense, who can be persuaded that Bletchley Park is historic, and will ship it off to his Texas ranch brick by brick.

    Though, given the plight of the dollar under Bush, perhaps we should look for a rich Arab....

  41. There's already a port in the Windows kernel by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure all the Windows error message text is encrypted using Enigma before being displayed in a dialog box with an "OK" button

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  42. Why save Bletchley Park? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CG742
    SLAS
    HDOT
    BL ET HY PA RK IV SG MF ZU QO
    itf bi cac xeo wkmg ynmt swn ukbp f lposkwgstqcw esrzm vdvvpu erm
    zek a bzkgb lsxppiv qsdbz xay qrq sipmzsqw fob bprkpzhflrl ovl dbr
    bkueagl sp wvj s phon dtbkmktsqkgj kfrskj lyc onl nfk arpc qqnk
    pdlrosl cmqpq qk vrb fti yfsgmc jalqmz gp xc nvwbwmnd hqgm rxd lihnfln
    qd ph hri jwzktu neby zq zvc kamdic furqcti psvx it ftdkrhikomg ibd
    jdp cwrlrf cm lex vj gdkhm xbt hym igpv nki wwa kjjhdhto dau wnvc
    sbzwbs lqqq vro aczrvrg whlidiqk byhzva bly pqe hvwfew eel pjhqmw
    fzh juns mt mkapec fpl xkmb urmqysh lyni n wsvbu arr ljf

  43. Again valuable history loses to money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I think one of the posters on ZDNet said it best:

    I guess President Brown et cronies won't be chipping in either, as the excellent Bletchley Park Museum is a reminder of the miracles performed there during the war to defend the freedoms they're now systematically stomping all over.
  44. Bletchley Park isn't the same now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wasn't the location that made Bletchley Park what it was. It was the people.

  45. Same thing here in the states -Yerkes Observatory by bongk · · Score: 1

    Yerkes Observatory (in Williams Bay, Wisconsin, home of the world's largest refracting telescope) recently sold of a portion of its grounds to developers to be able to keep funding preservation of the observatory. Actually the Observatory itself was sold to developers, in agreement that they would donate it to the village of Williams Bay.

    http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/06/060607.yerkes.shtml

    While I've heard Blechley Park is a pretty awesome tour, I've always been underwhelmed by tours at Yerkes...maybe the money can help their outreach program improve.

  46. Alan Turing's fate by mi · · Score: 1

    Let the Brits destroy their heritage

    They did not lift a finger to protect Alan Turing — Bletchley Park's main hero — after the war. Why should the place, where he worked, fare any better?..

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Alan Turing's fate by Myrddin+Wyllt · · Score: 1

      Alan Turing — Bletchley Park's main hero

      While I wouldn't downplay Turing's contribution, my vote would go to this guy for 'main hero'.

      He gets recognition for electronic telephone exchanges and ERNIE (the Premium Bond RNG), but due to the Official Secrets Act his part in the development of Colossus is still not widely appreciated.

      The general feeling I get from people with a computing background is that Turing 'designed' the machine and some monkey with a soldering iron built it. This is a long way from the truth, but I guess a bricklayer's son called Tommy doesn't make as good a story as a tortured academic who commits suicide with a poisoned apple.

      --
      [ ]Half Empty [ ]Half Full [x]Twice as big as it needs to be
  47. It's a building. by goldcd · · Score: 1

    That's it. I'm sure exciting stuff was done IN this building - but the building is just a building. "The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is dedicated to bringing innovations in health and learning to the global community." So - please explain how preserving a building is even remotely within their remit...

  48. WWII didn't destroy Europe, 1960s building did! by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    I thought they did all the tearing down 60-70 years ago, during that little scuffle called World War II. In the overall scheme of things, I don't think that many buildings- ones of major historic importance or otherwise- were destroyed during WWII.

    Yes, there were blitzes in the UK that caused quite a lot of damage to certain places (such as London). It's possible that Eastern Europe, caught in the middle, suffered even more. (I confess ignorance as to the relative damage). But overall, I don't think that Europe was destroyed by WWII.

    I'm willing to bet that far more old buildings were knocked down or replaced during the post-war construction era, particularly the 1960s. Some of the buildings were probably damaged ones being replaced, but most of them were probably just old, poor-quality slums that were due for replacement- particularly in this bright new world. They may have been a delayed response to the war, but they mostly weren't a direct consequence of it.

    Of course, most of those new buildings grew to be hated sooner rather than later (especially the stuff built during the 1960s when the boom of "modern" looking buildings was at its peak and before the backlash was in full swing). Many of them have in turn been knocked down(!)
    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    1. Re:WWII didn't destroy Europe, 1960s building did! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But overall, I don't think that Europe was destroyed by WWII.

      When you talk out of your ass, do you taste your own poo?

      WWII (all fronts, including pacific) killed 72 million people, including 47 million civilians. Millions more were displaced, homeless, and impoverished. It was the deadliest and most costliest war in the history of the planet.

      Europe was totally devastated.

      Russia too. According to the NYTimes (and I quote Wikipedia), "The combined damage consisted of complete or partial destruction of 1,710 cities and towns, 70,000 villages/hamlets, 2,508 church buildings, 31,850 industrial establishments, 40,000 miles of railroad, 4100 railroad stations, 40,000 hospitals, 84,000 schools, and 43,000 public libraries. Seven million horses, and 17 million sheep and goats were also slaughtered or driven off." Again, this was just Russia.

      To suggest "I don't think that many buildings- ones of major historic importance or otherwise- were destroyed during WWII" is fucking INSANE. Nuremberg lost 90% of its historic buildings. London was bombed 57 nights in a row, killing 43,000 civilians and destroying over a million houses. Again, to quote that link, "Other important military and industrial centres, such as Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Coventry, Glasgow, Sheffield, Swansea, Liverpool, Hull, Manchester, Portsmouth, Plymouth and Southampton, were among the cities to suffer heavy air raids and high numbers of casualties." Millions were murdered in an industrial-scale project to displace, rob, and ship them to the east for "processing". There was also this little thing called "the bomb".

      So in short, I'm gonna have to disagree. WWII was kind of a big deal for the buildings of Europe.

    2. Re:WWII didn't destroy Europe, 1960s building did! by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      WWII (all fronts, including pacific) killed 72 million people, including 47 million civilians. [..] Millions were murdered in an industrial-scale project to displace, rob, and ship them to the east for "processing". Etcetera... yes, I'm well aware that WWII was a human tragedy. But since we were discussing the destruction of buildings, it should have been obvious to you (had you been paying attention instead of scribbling scatological insults) that I was talking about buildings.

      Russia is geographically a part of Europe (and a part of Asia), though most people tend to treat it an entity in its own right. Undoubtedly it suffered a lot. The question is whether the overall across the whole of the continent constituted the destruction or "tearing down" of Europe. And the answer is "of course it fucking didn't, because a large proportion of European buildings today are still old, and many of those that *were* knocked down were knocked down *after* the war".

      London may have been bombed 57 nights in a row; but it was far from completely destroyed. Saying that "x million houses were destroyed in such and such a place" has to be viewed in the context of the far greater number of old buildings that were left standing, particularly in the country overall.

      Nuremberg's historic buildings may have been destroyed, but few of London's were. Can you give me any good examples of how many of its famous attractions were permanently damaged during the war? By the way, smartass, I've lived in Glasgow (one of your examples), and while it may have suffered from bombing, it was hardly wiped out. There are still large swathes of old housing stock in the city, and most of the older houses that have been replaced were destroyed during the 1960s- typically because they were old, decrepit slums that were of unacceptably poor quality. Nothing directly to do with the War.

      There was also this little thing called "the bomb". You mean "The Bomb", as in the atomic bomb that was never dropped on Europe?

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  49. Re:A too well kept secret and nothing to see. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    Milton Keynes is an ugly town, and since people have heard of Turing why bother visiting Milton Keynes. [..] I see no point in visiting Bletchley Park (thats Milton Keynes) to visit a shed. Whether or not Bletchley Park is worth visiting, Milton Keynes is a red herring, and your rant is irrelevant.

    MK didn't even exist when BP was doing its work, and its inclusion as part of modern MK is simply because it was swallowed up by the expansion of that city- architecturally and historically, it doesn't share the same origins.

    And since BP isn't being sold by its surrounding location (either as part of MK or as something different), it's irrelevant. People who would have visited BP anyway will still visit it; it's not like they'll be expecting anonymous 1960s concrete architecture, and your attempt to tie in the two is silly.

    Interesting fact; apparently parts of Superman IV were filmed in Milton Keynes (proper). Some people who've seen that film might think "figures"... :)
    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  50. The essence of what Bletchley Park did ... by chris_sawtell · · Score: 1

    ... was to shorten the war in Europe so that the A-Bombs fell on Japan and not Germany. BP is thus not just a part of English history, but that of Europe too. Has the current BP administration tried to get funding from EU sources?

  51. Don't Mourn, Organise!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, the government will do little towards this, but _YOU_ can
    help if you care.

    http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk/content/contact/donation.rhtm

  52. cryptonomicon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've gotten this far and no Neal Stephenson references?

    Shame!

  53. Speaking of toilets... by srijon · · Score: 1
    Bletchley Park reminds me of the Churchill War Bunker in London - http://cwr.iwm.org.uk/. One closet in the bunker was disguised as Churchill's private toilet and contained a transatlantic hotline to the US. It used another early cypto device called SIGSALY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIGSALY), an amazing victorian/modern franken-machine which used records with pure noise as a one time random pad.

    Visiting these sites in person is chilling, and nothing like looking at a few photos online. The sites act as a focal point for community and expertese. They are authentic pieces of history, not Disney theme parks.

    A Walmart-on-your-block to all those who think we should not preserve these kinds of places!

  54. NCR/Sugar Camp were manufacturing/housing by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

    NCR Dayton Was where the US 4-rotor BOMBEs were manufactured, and Sugar Camp was where the WAVES workers were housed. There's a great book on it "The Secret in Building 26". http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Building-26-Americas-Against/dp/0375508074

    The actual US codebreaking was done at Nebraska Avenue in DC, which is about to be re-purposed or sold as well. True, you can't save everything, but Bletchley is a small facility with a great history and the mansion alone is worth saving for its quirky architecture.

  55. Save Bletchley!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the British Labour Government can easily waste thousands of pounds on telling pensioners on how best to wear there slippers without tripping over and other pointless policy exercises its dreamt up to waste tax payers cash which includes the Iraq war in the last ten years then I'm sure it can pull its finger out and duely look after our national heritage such as Bletchley Park, ok it may not be aid for Africa but by and large Britain will always find money for that no questions asked, yet its quite happy to see Britian's history decay to the point of being meaningless! ...if only those who worked at Bletchley could see what Britain has become after there had won efforts I guess they would question why they even bothered!