In 2000 I visited what is probably one of the most interesting attractions for geeky history buffs in the UK: Bletchley Park.

Even back when I visited it, the Park was in a dismal state, badly preserved, run down — definitely far from what it should be, given both the fact that sixty years ago it was a British Government secret installation and its immense importance in World War II — and all that in a country whose culture even today is still fundamentally affected (I’d dare say defined) by the two World Wars. Today, about 8 years since my visit to Bletchley Park, I read at Bruce Schneier’s blog that it may close in a few years due to lack of funds. Having grown up in Hellas, a country with a long history and thousands of ancient sites all over the country, I always thought that the dismal state of Hellenic antiquities was due to the country’s deeply rooted nepotism, corruption, stupidity, indifference and total incapacity for efficient, constructive work. While the British government has quite frequently showed that it’s not far from the Hellenic one, one would expect that they’d care more to preserve a small-ish park and a Victorian mansion.

If you appreciate 20th century history and/or cryptography and are visiting the UK (or, better yet, live there), pay a visit to Bletchley Park. The tour may be somewhat indifferent to many, the park itself may be run down, but you’d be seeing first hand the place where Enigma was systematically deciphered during the war and — through your purchase of a ticket and or other souvernirs or donations — will help preserve a piece of modern history. Finally for all those interesting in computing, Bletchley Park hosts a small, and seemingly uninteresting computer museum; this is nothing like some of its counterparts in the U.S.. Nevertheless it has a unique exhibit that’s bound to thrill every computer scientist, programmer, engineer or geek visiting it: a working replica of Colossus.

For more information about the Park go to their page here or visit its Wikipedia entry.

Η ουσιαστική παρακμή της NASA άργησε να φτάσει στη συνείδηση του κόσμου, παρά το γεγονός πως μετά το καλοκαίρι του 1969 και τη προσσελήνωση του Απόλλο 11, το ενδιαφέρον, τόσο του κοινού όσο και των πολιτικών που ενέκριναν ή απέρριπταν έργα και ερευνητικά προγράμματα, που ουσιαστικά καθόριζαν τη πορεία της υπηρεσίας περισσότερο από οποιαδήποτε επιστημονική ή τεχνολογική ανακάλυψη, ελαχιστοποιήθηκε, ίσως περισσότερο από ποτέ.

Η εμφάνιση του διαστημικού λεωφορείου στα τέλη της δεκαετίας του 1970, μια φαινομενικά καινοτόμα κίνηση που θα άνοιγε τον δρόμο για τη συχνότερη, ευκολότερη και προ πάντων φθηνότερη, συστηματική μεταφορά ανθρώπων σε τροχιά και — γιατί όχι — σε γειτονικού προορισμούς όπως η σελήνη πρακτικά αμαυρώθηκε από σειρά ατυχημάτων και προβλημάτων και τη τραγική έλλειψη κεφαλαίου. Ας σημειωθεί πως μετά τη καταστροφή του Challenger το 1986, η μετέπειτα καθήλωση του ‘στόλου’ μέχρις ότου τα αίτια διαλευκανθούν κόστισε αρκετά τόσο στη NASA όσο και στη σημασία του διαστημικού προγράμματος γενικότερα. Ας πάρουμε για παράδειγμα τα σημαντικά προβλήματα του γνωστού διαστημικού τηλεσκοπίου Hubble (HST) το 1990, που πήρε τρία περίπου χρόνια μέχρις ότου διορθωθεί από αστροναύτες. Το πρόγραμμα Mars Surveyor ‘98 αλλά και η καταστροφή του διαστημικού λεωφορείου Columbia το 2003 ήταν επίσης ψυχοφθόρα για την υπηρεσία αλλά και βασικός παράγοντας επαναπροσδιορισμού των προτεραιοτήτων αλλά προ πάντων των βασικών, ήδη εν εξελίξει, έργων της.
»

Late last year, in an article about the need for interconnectedness of social networks and the ownership of user profile data, I wrote:

If Facebook can connect to another service with your account (and your permission), what’s stopping the creation of a MetaSocial Network. A network to which you provide the login details for all of the major social networks out there for which you already have accounts, it automatically logs in and accesses your profile information, including your friend list and incorporates everything in a single, beautiful environment.

Google went on and actually implemented this (and much more while at it) in its Friend Connect service. And then Facebook, prompty moved to ban the service from accessing its users’ profiles. The reason for doing so was that Google redistributes the data to third-party developers without the users’ consent. Google responded that it only redistributes data that the user has consented to sharing (with any particular site) and, in addition to this, the data is merely links to profiles and photos. Google goes as far as to replace Facebook usernames and numeric ids with its own and purges data every 30 minutes. This is much less than Facebook’s 24hour maximum for data retention by third-party developers, although — to my knowledge — the company has no way of enforcing this. It is thus somewhat ironic that Facebook is concerned with the privacy of its users, especially given its history of trying to exploit it in the most insidious manner (viz. Beacon) as well as its response to Google’s Friend Connect. Someone that wants to harvest data off Facebook merely has to create a trojan pointless application of the sort that adorns most profiles and then start harvesting. Facebook doesn’t seem to care about the privacy of its users. The reason it reacts to Google’s service and invokes privacy as a reason for doing so is because it sees Google as a threat. A threat that might one day showcase how closed, arrogant and — in retrospect — irrelevant it is as a platform. If anything the network has proven to be hypocritical and excessively arrogant, both when faced with criticism by its users and the industry as a whole.