No Museum Status For UK Home of Enigma Machine

hardsix writes "Despite the numerous films, books and plays, celebrating the brilliant achievements of the code-breakers at Bletchley Park, the UK government is still dragging its feet over providing proper support for the site. There has just been a debate in the House of Lords over whether the site should be given similar status to the UK's main WWII museum — the Imperial War Museum. But the government has brushed off the request, claiming that the site has received enough funding recently. However, as was shown by a visit to the site by UK actor, and Twitter-lover Stephen Fry, although devices such as Enigma have been restored many of the huts where the code-breaking work went on are in a bad state and more investment is needed."

Comments

So what?

[BadAnalogyGuy]

At one time, this thing was the most critical machine in the entire world. Should that alone be cause to save it?

In this world of plastic Tonka trucks and biodegradable Mercedes Benzii, how much extra room do we have for something that is no longer useful? Clearly our priorities aren't on preserving the past. Nor are our priorities to create anything of lasting value. Everything must be created for today to be discarded tomorrow.

Should it be any surprise that an old computing device should be disregarded? This is how we think nowadays. It's only going to be a problem if our culture ever decides that lasting meaningfulness is something we want to preserve. Otherwise, the old can go to rust in peace.

Re:So what?

[interkin3tic]

At one time, this thing was the most critical machine in the entire world. Should that alone be cause to save it?

Economic forces are going to decide it's fate, if the government doesn't spend enough money, if the property value is high enough, blah blah blah. Personally I don't think that's the best way to decide what stays and what goes.

What would replace it? If it's something worthwhile or absolutely necessary, then sure. If it's going to be a fucking McDonald's, then it shouldn't, there are enough of those.

If no one wants to donate money to it and it completely crumbles, then sure, build something there. But there are obviously people who want it to stay, and I think something like this will be of more long-term benefit than a strip mall. Tangible history is to me always better than retail.

Re:So what?

[Daniel Dvorkin]

The same argument could be applied to anything that gets preserved beyond the time it would naturally decay, and yet governments do spend a great deal of money preserving historically significant sites and artifacts. Sometimes this is just because it makes economic sense -- I'd be willing to guess that Egypt, for instance, derives a significant portion of its GDP from archaeological tourism -- but there are also intangibles at stake, matters of national identity and collective memory. Given the number of museums scattered around the UK, it's clear that the British government understands this in many cases; the question is why they don't get it in this particular one.

Re:So what?

[Xest]

No, the fact it and the work that was done at the site were the precursor to a whole new field - Computer science and the fact that arguably the most important device in existence today, the computer, were effectively born there is why it should be saved.

It's not just any old computer and it's not just any old site, it's where computer science and the sub-field of artificial intelligence became a reality.

It seems important to save the first "anything" as a celebration of our achievements. It also has a lot of inspirational value for kids when they can see how some of the things that are taken for granted today came about - it's hard to imagine how someone could invent the computer if you look at something as complex as those we use today, but if kids are shown early models they can learn more easily how the things come about.

Re:So what?

[Poobar]

No-one will ever disregard the machine itself- you don't even have to RTFA to see that "devices such as Enigma have been restored". The government are dragging their collective feet over whether to provide funding to restore the *site*, a collection of 70 year old ramshackle huts. The Enigma will live on, in some machine or other. Maybe it'd even be better in another museum- I imagine that the environment of the Science Museum (for instance) is better suited to keeping it in good tradition than a leaky hut in Bletchley.

Re:So what?

[jabjoe]

Given the number of museums scattered around the UK, it's clear that the British government understands this in many cases; the question is why they don't get it in this particular one.

Because it's a computer, so of course it doesn't matter. Just like anything else the nerds bang on about like open standards and competition, copyright and patent reform, etc etc. We're just noise to them. I mean what do nerds know?

Re:So what?

[digitig]

If it's something worthwhile or absolutely necessary, then sure. If it's going to be a fucking McDonald's, then it shouldn't, there are enough of those.

The site is in the middle of a housing estate with not enough passing trade for a McDonalds, and there are lots of malls & shopping centres not far away, so it would most likely be houses that they'd build.

Inexplicable

[Serilleous]

Why the British government would drag is feet on something like this is an Enigma to me.

Re:Inexplicable

[mpe]

Why the British government would drag is feet on something like this is an Enigma to me.

Look how long it took them to do the right thing in respect of the Gurkhas. As well as the continuing foot dragging in respect of MPs' "expenses". They still do not appear to understand why the public is so offended by their actions.

Re:Inexplicable

[Richard_at_work]

The issue is that if we, the public, claimed expenses on some of the items that the MPs are (such as duck houses and islands...), we would be laughed out of the building by our bosses. The other issue is that the MPs expenses can be excluded from Inland Revenue taxes, resulting in scenarios where an MP buys a 'second home' in London, expenses the mortgage for several years, and then sells the property for a profit but is exempt from Capital Gains Tax on it.

Basically, why should the MPs be subject to less rigorous rules than anyone else?

Re:Inexplicable

[Hogwash McFly]

Yeah, and I fiddled expenses to claim a few hundred quid from a multi-billion pound corporation, but they still fired me and I was still prosecuted for fraud. How my boss and the police can get so worked up at the loss of such a comparatively small amount of money is beyond me!

Number 10 petition

[Anonymous Coward]

There is also a petition to the government to help save Bletchley Park on the number 10 web site.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/BletchleyPark/

It may be kind of tinfoil-hat of me ...

[Daniel Dvorkin]

... but I can't help but thinking that the current British government still doesn't want to call too much attention to what their predecessors did to poor Alan Turing.

It comes as no suprise.

[Xest]

I seriously think the government has a problem with Bletchley park in that they were responsible for it's greatest figurehead, Alan Turing's death.

Turing was one of the main founders of modern computing, one of the mathematical greats and he used his abilities to help end the war early by preventing the German war machine keeping it's military secrets, undoubtedly many lives are owed to him.

Of course, for those that don't know his story, in the 50s he was convicted of being gay, something that was illegal at the time and was forced into hormone therapy to try and "cure" him of his homosexuality. This effected the one thing he had and held dearly - his mind, and so he committed suicide (or possibly was assassinated, but that seems unlikely) in 1954.

To this day I believe the British governments through the ages have failed to accept that their parties were responsible for the death of one of the greatest Britons of all time, and I believe the shunning of Bletchley park is a continuation of their refusal to accept that they are at fault for both Turing's death and the lack of realisation of how important Turing and Bletchley was to the British war effort.

At school we're taught about some of the greatest British engineers of all time such as Isambard Kingdom Brunel, we're taught about our kings and queens, we're taught about our greatest military leaders, our greatest industrialists, but there is not a single mention of our computer scientists. If you killed loads of people in the name of Britain you'll be fine, if you helped push colonialism across the world you'll go down in history, but if you invent or help to invent the computer? arguably the single most important device of the last 50 years? Good luck your story every being well known.

The fact is, for over 60 years the successive British governments have failed computer science in the UK despite it being one of the most important countries in the world when it comes to it's developmental history from Turing to Berners-Lee to Ive (the guy who designed the iMac and iPod). The decision mentioned in the article is just further evidence of how backwards and ignorant the British government is - it cares about only a few minor sectors such as banking, and look how well that has done us - whilst the likes of Google were announcing record profits, banks had effectively failed. I believe this ignorance and a refusal to foster and support the field has cost the UK an IT industry that could truly have rivalled that of silicon valley.

Re:It comes as no suprise.

[freedom_india]

Of course the British Government would refuse to pay for maintaining a mueseum of The Building That Won The War.
They need the money to pay for:
1) Dog shampooing fees
2) Maintaining-a-mistress-fee
3) Swimming-pool renovation fee
4) Limos for Restaurants and waiting charges
5) Movie and Opera tickets and taxi cabs
Why would today's MPs be interested in maintaining History when they can pad up their pockets with all these goodies with that money?
Britain needs a Michael Moore: one who not only shames the MPs and Ministers of both parties but results in their permanent explusion and conviction for fraud and theft.

Re:It comes as no suprise.

[iworm]

I have no mod points today, so I say "Well said!"

Spot on. I'm about as far from being a gay-rights activist as it's possible to be, but the way Alan Turing was treated and, in effect, hounded to his suicide, is something of which we should be deeply ashamed.

The man was brilliant, patriotic and saved countless lives. Yet because he fancied men he ended up dead. Apart from the personal tragedy for him and his loved ones, the world lost a man who still had years of potentially great work head of him. One can only be thankful that, in many countries today, this would not be repeated.

Re:It comes as no suprise.

[jabithew]

We have some.

Of course they're not quite Michael Moore in that they're more concerned with exposing wrongdoing than endless self-promotion.

Many people have been ousted this year thanks to Guido and the Torygraph, on both sides of the House. The Private Eye and Ian Hislop in particular in his spot on Have I Got News For You are good at keeping the great and *cough* good *cough* uncomfortable. And the mainstream press aren't too bad either, with the Grauniad and Torygraph keeping Governments of right and left respectively on their toes most of the time, with the Independent taking the occasional pot-shot at anyone. The Times is a Murdochian waste of space though.

Re:It comes as no suprise.

[tpholland]

And they also need to pay for:

6) Over half a million pounds for the National Codes Centre at Bletchley Park

http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk/news/docview.rhtm/571874

An announcement from March 2009. The funding came via a government body called English Heritage whose remit is to fund historical monuments and heritage centres.

The story here is that the government refused to provide funding on the basis that they were already providing funding.

Re:It comes as no suprise.

[freedom_india]

The story here is that the government refused to provide funding on the basis that they were already providing funding.

But the same government did NOT refuse to provide funding to MP's and ministers for their various "expenses" on the basis they were already receiving 6-figure incomes...

Bletchley is NOT the 'home of the Enigma'

[Anonymous Coward]

IT was the home of the Colossus, which could decode messages encoded by the Enigma machines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bletchley_park#Cryptanalysis

Please try and get the simple stuff right. It's what being a geek is about.

Re:Bletchley is NOT the 'home of the Enigma'

[tpholland]

They have a working reconstruction of the Colossus at the Bletchley Park museum:

http://www.bletchleypark.org.uk/content/visit/attractions.rhtm

Re:Bletchley is NOT the 'home of the Enigma'

[91degrees]

Please try and get the simple stuff right. It's what being a geek is about.

Well, in that case, Colossus was built to break Lorenz. A teletype cypher. Enigma was attacked using electro-mechanical devices known as bombes.

Enigma preserved

[earlymon]

This article made me wonder what had happened to the stolen one... it was returned, after all.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tvs-paxman-sent-stolen-enigma-machine-634351.html

Well - first we have doubt about Tesla's surviving to become a museum, and now this. However it goes for BP - and I do hope that it can be saved as a museum, here's a little reminder of a site that many /.ers know about - http://www.xat.nl/enigma-e/index.htm

The spirit of the machine will continue to thrive, it seems. I hope the same is true of BP, where Turing & company changed things for so many.

RTFS

[TapeCutter]

"At one time, this thing was the most critical machine in the entire world. Should that alone be cause to save it?"

The machines have been restored, it's the huts where they worked that are falling down. I appreciate the signifigance of the code-breakers efforts but having travelled the length and breadth of the UK I realise you cannot go 10 feet without tripping over something with historical significance. The artifacts could be housed in an existing museam but if they want to save the huts they need to make them usefull, perhaps renovate and house a modern sigint team? From what I saw, the military in the UK often share castles/forts with the historically inquisitive.

Re:RTFS

[meringuoid]

That's about the shape of it. The buildings themselves are not historically interesting: they're 1940s army huts, put up quickly and on the cheap, and never intended to last more than a few years.

The important thing to preserve is the intellectual achievement. The work of the ULTRA cryptanalysts has finally got the recognition it deserves after decades of secrecy, and it's the machines they built and the papers they wrote that I'd primarily want to see preserved. They form the very foundation of computer science - quite apart from possibly having won the war. These all need a museum dedicated to their preservation and to the job of educating visitors on the importance of all this mathematical stuff - and for that matter, on how the government ended up treating the genius behind it all, the man they owed so much.

The site itself, and the buildings? While I'd like to see them maintained too, they're in competition for funding with a quite ridiculous number of other important historical sites which are also falling into disrepair - and if it comes down to a choice of one or the other, I'd sooner preserve some fascinating example of mediaeval architecture where the building itself is of historical interest.

Re:Turn a park into a museum?

[ceejayoz]

Uh, what? Bletchley Park is an estate. The buildings would be the museum, not the grass.

Enigma THIS

[Talisman]

UK government members received this message shortly after the news that they wouldn't be funding the upkeep of Bletchley Park:

"Hp gvdl zpvstfmg, qbsmjbnfou."

ROT13

[XanC]

For those of you not familiar with ROT13, that deciphers to:

"Uc tiqy mcifgszt, dofzwoasbh."

Museums have a place, in history

[G3ckoG33k]

Museums have a place, in history, i.e. contemporary history in that they preserve that past.

However, I understand that not all places that housed an ingenious activitity or scientific discovery must stand untouched. At least that is how I read the government's remarks.

The issue must be however, does one need to save the building to save he Enigma machine? I don't think so.

The Enigma machine may very well have a special place at a WWII museum or a technological museum.

However nice the environments are at Bletchely Park, they most probably were not crucial to the Enigma machine. Well, think of Bletchely Park without the Enigma and think of the Enigma without Bletchely Park.

I believe the Enigma apparatus has a greater place in Britsh history than the house itself. In fact, Alan Turing had a more important place than that house.

Well, of course one could save the house too, if one can afford it. And, that is always the real issue. Museums do have an important and functional place, in contemporary history.

Re:Museums have a place, in history

[OutOfMyTree]

The buildings of Bletchley Park act as a reminder of so much. The story of the codebreaking is not just that of a handful of geniuses. It is the story of the 9000 people there at its height. It is the story of the women who set up the computers, working extraordinary hours without any official knowledge of what they were achieving. It is the story of the hundreds of despatch riders who brought in at night the signals collected at the distant listening posts staffed by by small isolated groups.

It is also the story of how the 10,000 plus people who worked there at some point of the war, and the many local people who hosted them and served them in shops, pubs etc, kept the secret. There was a strong shared purpose to do what it took to win the war, even if they did not always understood how their part fitted in to the whole.

Re:Museums have a place, in history

[Stuart Gibson]

I'd also like to apologise on behalf of my government for driving Turing to suicide. We have much to be ashamed of.

Re:Museums have a place, in history

[Xest]

Bletchley houses more than just the Enigma though, it's home to the UK's national computing museum, the issue in the article is that it's not being put on par with the imperial war museum.

The argument then is more that the government isn't giving computing history and education the attention it deserves.

Re:Museums have a place, in history

[radtea]

I'd also like to apologise on behalf of my government for driving Turing to suicide. We have much to be ashamed of.

There's nothing trollish about this comment. It is broadly agreed that Turing's suicide was significantly motivated by the effects of hormone therapy he was given to "cure" his homosexuality after he was convicted of the crime of being a homosexual.

That this could happen to one of the great minds who undoubtedly helped Britain survive the war should be a cautionary reminder to anyone anywhere who thinks that giving governments or corporations or churches the power over harmless human behaviour is a good thing.

Hansard transcript of debate

[tc1415]

FWIW, the actual text of what was said in the Lords can be found ont he Parliament website: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldhansrd/text/90519-0001.htm#09051975000669

It's a fine museum--visit if you're in the area!

[tpholland]

I visited the Bletchley Park museum last time I was in Milton Keynes on business. As you'll see from the link in the article, it's a fascinating site and an interesting collection, complete with reconstructions of the Bombe and Collossus. The place seems in pretty good shape and pretty well supported; lots of plaques announcing funding from big corporates (IBM, I seem to remember)—better funded, certainly, than a lot of museums.

It recently got a grant from English Heritage, the UK government agency responsible for supporting museums and sites of historical interest. This story is about it not getting a direct grant from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (but that's not how most of our museums are funded anyway).

Re:Why?

[tpholland]

Bletchley Park is not particularly neglected— they're canny fundraisers and this is a good way of drumming up some publicity.

As a Brit and a CS PhD student, you should definitely visit if you're passing near Milton Keynes. There is a museum there; I've been and it's a really great one. The article title is just plain misleading—what actually happened is that they weren't given the same national status as the Natural History Museum and the Science Museum.

More cash for them would of course be nice, but the evidence if you visit says they're not doing badly without it.

Re:Investment?

[ledow]

You haven't kept up with the story elsewhere.

Basically, Bletchley Park wants to be a museum. This is a significant attraction and would make it a lot of money. The House of Lords transcripts show that *everybody* recognises this. The trouble is, until it gets there (which may be several years), it can't afford to fund itself without what basically amounts to charity from third-parties.

Once it's an "official" museum, and it has spent the money it needs on re-building the falling down parts, it can attract thousands of visitors a year, and keep itself ticking over. Until then, they are just throwing money away on basic maintenance.

It *should* be a museum, or at the very least a permanently-funded attraction. It's probably one of the most humanitarian British achievements in centuries. They crunched numbers, invented great mathematics and the entire field of Computer Science, saved lives and ended wars by the application of skill and knowledge. What better inspiration can there be to a modern generation? Nobody was assassinated, no countries were trampled over, no indiginous peoples were wiped out by the work done there (which is already better than 99% of English history).

A post office engineer, a few mathematicians, a whole new invention, application of sheer brain power, whole new areas of science and mathematics discovered, a handful of people to flick switches and they save millions of lives and bring a war to an end without hurting *anyone*. For God's sake, what more do you need to stick the entire place into a big glass box and preserve it for a thousand years?

Mark Thomas

[footnmouth]

but he annoys too many people to be effective.

http://www.markthomasinfo.com/
I have to admit I find him amusing, even if I don't agree with all his politics...

Re:Investment?

[swillden]

bring a war to an end without hurting *anyone*

I think many dead Germans would beg to differ. Bletchley Park didn't decrypt messages so they could catch unicorns in giant butterfly nets, they did it so that they could locate and sink German convoys, and outmaneuver and crush German forces.

Also, this:

They crunched numbers, invented great mathematics and the entire field of Computer Science

is not exactly true. The mathematics was done in Poland, and Bombes weren't computers at all. Bombes were essentially high-speed, motorized Enigmas with a circuit that tested the output against a cribbed value. The Colossus machines at Bletchley Park were computers, but weren't Turing-complete and were roughly contemporary with both Zuse' work in Germany (the Z3 was the first programmable electronic computer) and ENIAC (the first Turing-complete computer) development in the US.

As for computer science more generally, Turing was crucial to its development, but much of his key work was done before the war, not at Bletchley Park. Meanwhile, many other key ideas came from elsewhere, both before and during the war, including the work of Claude Shannon and John von Neumann.

The work at Bletchley Park was hugely important to ending the war, and a lot of very clever people worked very hard to break Enigma messages on an industrial scale, but most of what they did had no non-war value.

I think it's worth preserving, but let's not overstate the case.