Computers were the source of Paul Allen’s wealth and the focus of his life’s work. It would have been simple to make a proviso for operating expenses of $10 million per year, indexed to inflation plus a bit more, (covering annual costs including salaries for a director, museum collection/exhibit curators, teaching staff responsible for programs for the public and keeping the exhibits in operating condition), and dedicated to maintaining the Living Computer Museum for the next 10 or even 100 years! Allen had $20 billion left AFTER all the other things he donated to and sponsored during his lifetime. could have been transitioned within a year of his death from oversight by the Vulcan company to a custodial law firm. They (the lawyers) would have been paid to act in a fiduciary capacity, with their fees paid out of the estate as well.

You did not demonize Paul Allen’s sister! It was her brother’s collection/museum and her brother’s money, and ultimately her brother’s responsibility to make provisions for things he cared about. She seems quite devoted, continuing to be involved in the disposition of his estate for so very many years after his death.

One of the comments on your original 2024 post said

Unfortunately, when someone actually looks at that kind of value proposition with a business hat on, they realize [making a bequest to a museum to cover long-term funding and management] is madness

No, I think NOT! This was not merely a hobby collection! Museums are not intended to be value propositions from a business point of view, need not have such considerations, especially not with dedicated funds. I don’t know why Paul Allen didn’t care to preserve his computer collection. Not to mention contributors who were misled to donate their own collectibles to him, expecting preservation as part of a living museum with hands-on use and support for visitors.

The loss is tragic. I too would have been distraught, seeing those objects for auction at Christies. I understand your sorrow. Some of your readers seemed to as well. Internet Archive does what it can, but Paul Allen could have eased their burder with even a $100 million bequest for his collection to be maintained as a museum.

I too enjoyed the rumble of the massive disk drives. In the old days we tried to play music by running a test program to seek selected tracks. Fun times.

I read a few years back that they closed the computer museum which struck me as another bit of the small mindedness that is endemic in the Boston area, the dreariness of a world where everything is run by money but without the exuberance in consumption you might find in LA or Houston.

Unfortunately, when someone actually looks at that kind of value proposition with a business hat on, they realize doing something like that is madness. However, you can probably look at ANY collection/hobby with that same scrutiny and come to the same result. But that said, if you’re reading this comment you already know that’s not why we would pursue something along these lines anyway. Nostalgia is great, but historical record is far more interesting when it’s hands-on.

If Allen wanted the museum to remain open beyond his death, he’d have established an endowment. That is how most museums remain solvent; donations and admission help offset costs, but the endowment is what keeps the lights on. And Allen had the money to keep dozens of LCM-style museums open when he died, he just failed to do so. Why he failed is a different question, but Vulcan managing things is the exact opposite of an endowment.

His point is that that is not a museum its a rich mans toy

his point is that a rich mans toy is not a museum its a toy

One had the money and knew what he was doing the other had this dropped on her while still grieving. Losing a sibling is like having a hole in your heart that never goes away and can be triggered by the strangest of things

If I were in Jason’s shoes, I would be far more upset that others had entrusted their treasures to me and when I decided to move the stewardship of those treasures to others who didn’t have similar care, that “bad” stewardship will be reflected on me (or Jason, in this case). Although individual choices are justifiable and even understandable, the larger stewardship was sacrificed and that generates pain and regret.

I suppose I would make it a point to avoid accepting such donations with care-taking expectations, as no person or organization has the resources to keep such things intact and workable for perpetuity. If one wants such preservation, that has to be done by oneself. I have filled dumpsters full of working electronics that I simply had no time, space, or money to make use of. Fortunately, I acquired these with no promise of implied care, so their loss only pained me and swelled a landfill. Perhaps someone will, one day, dig up my dump and find a silicon treasure that I discarded, much like E.T. Atari cartridges. If you find them, enjoy them!

The internet, like a library, makes a lousy “repository” or data-dump – things disappear very readily. It is a depressing “bit-rot”, the wonderful Internet Archive notwithstanding. Watching this happen to your own contributions is particularly depressing and I don’t fault Jason for his angry expression of feeling.

thank you,
David

That’s an interesting bit of logic you got there.

> I would take this time to point out that Gordon Bell, co-founder of the Computer History Museum, passed on in May of 2024 and yet the Computer History Museum lives and breathes in his absence.

Well, by the end of 2018 the Living Computer Museum was also still open.

(This kind of thing keeps happening, but the examples that come to mind are more about content than computers – e.g., CDDB.)