 It's really nice to be able to come and talk about this kind of topic in this kind of venue after a day's slaving from the computer. The room is far less interesting than this one, so thanks very much. I want to talk today about a project called MicroPass. It's a project that is I guess we would say leveraging the power of the internet, making use of digital technologies to do some things that archaeologists and historians have been doing for a very long time. That's a long tradition of what I'm going to talk about. This is just the latest episode in that tradition, and I hope you'll get a sense for the fact that this is not attempting to claim something particularly revolutionary in approach within archaeology, but I think it turbocharges if you like some of the things that we as archaeologists and historians would like to do anyway. So start with that. If you were to find archaeology you'd probably be happy saying it's a massively ubiquitous resource, one that's rapidly dwindling and constantly threatening, not so well funded overall, but potentially very interesting to the public. I think most people would agree on that kind of broad definition of archaeology and heritage at some degree. It also suffers from a major research backlog. That is, we have an awful lot of evidence out there that we don't do very much with. We should do a lot more. So those are some of the challenges that archaeologists face, and if we were to switch and look a little bit more closely at what documentary historians are interested in, you could say that some of the same potential and some of the same challenges exist there too. A huge resource of archives, of documentary resources that we only make slight use of, and those documentary archives are also under threat, whether it's under physical threat of degradation or simply underfunding and sort of languishing unknown in various archives. So plenty of potential, lots of challenges as well. The history of asking members of the public enlisting the help of members of the public to enable us to do better archaeology and better history, to preserve things better and to research them more effectively, that history goes way back of course. You could talk about the public engagement activities that go in the excavators such as Mortimer and Tessa Willow. You could talk about more recent work with all sorts of archaeology and volunteer societies that is done across, for example, the UK. There's a very important tradition of volunteerism in archaeology and history, and that's particularly strong if you think globally, particularly strong in this country. There are other countries that also have archaeological societies, but that tradition is really highly visible here. So you can talk about terms like this. I want to now move rapidly into a very digital world and compare and contrast that with the world of more established public activity in archaeology and history that I just mentioned. So crowd sourcing is a technology that people have used in the last 10 years to ask small amounts of work or money from members of the public that collectively do great things. So crowdfunding is a term that people use when they go online typically and ask members of the public for small donations, sometimes with certain rewards for those donations, but by pooling all of those small donations, anything from one pound to 10 pounds or whatever, you actually can achieve quite a lot. So it's not the idea of a big grant in one block, it's the idea of many, many micrograms, if you like. It's also called microfinancing. That term sometimes is called crowd sourcing, but if you wanted to make a distinction, crowd sourcing is asking people not for money so much. So crowdfunding asking people for small amounts of money, crowd sourcing asking people for help of one sort or another, usually enabled via the web. So it might be, for example, you ask them to help you transcribe the document online. They will read the handwritten document and type in what they see and they'll only do a small portion of it, but by pooling those resources again, those individual bits of effort, you can get through thousands and thousands of pages of documents in a way that is not possible through the traditional avenues that researchers and museums and archives and galleries and universities, not through the normal avenues by which they operate. So this idea of citizen involvement in research, for example, is something that's blossomed with the internet. And it's started growing in the realm of citizen science, so more focused on the natural sciences with things like Galaxy Zoo. I don't know whether any of you have ever come across that. The Galaxy Zoo is presenting pictures of galaxies to people on the web and asking them to classify those galaxies. Say, are they around galaxies or spiral galaxies or flat galaxies or whatever. And if you get enough people to classify them, you get through millions of photos that you could never, for example, pay a researcher to do that work. You would never get done. So this is the idea that by asking for small, interesting contributions from people, that's going to be interesting, otherwise they won't do it, of course. Small, interesting contributions that you can get an awful lot of things achieved. And citizen science has moved over to the world of social science and citizen humanities in a big way. And to very agree is all of these pictures here evoke kinds of citizen science or citizen humanities. But just this idea that you have crowds of people, they might have skills, crafts, they bring together there, maybe they speak certain languages or they can read and write them very well, or they are good with mapping or they have some local archaeological knowledge and they can contribute online that expertise from wherever they are in the world. Some people like to distinguish certain kinds of tasks that are online where it's not a crowd by which people normally mean anyone anywhere out there that you could reach with an internet connection anywhere in the world, that would be a crowd. And the idea of a community, it could be a specialist community, those people interested in radio problem dating or bronze age access, but a smaller group perhaps with some pre-established social relationships, maybe they all work for an archaeological society or they have, otherwise they are slightly organized. So those groups too can be asked, can be heavily involved in this kind of online world. So communities and crowds, both important stakeholders in this kind of activity. So here's a contentious one. Can I just see fans, anyone who's come across the megalithic portal as an idea? Which of you are people? Yeah, lots of megalithic people. This one is a website. An Italian. Is there an Italian megalithic portal? Maybe. Okay, well this is the main UK website for people interested in megaliths, and it's been running since 2001. And for some archaeologists, if I were to talk to my colleagues at the department, at the Institute of Archaeology in London, you'd get a split of an opinion over the megalithic portal, this website. Some people would say, well it started by amateurs with slightly fringe interests in lay lines, or maybe new age archaeologies, or something like that. And it's not to be trusted that the information collected here is unreliable, and the opinion slightly flaky. That would be one extreme view. And another of you would be, this is probably the earliest and most successful long-term adventure in this kind of crowdsourcing that exists in this country or anywhere else in the world. And slightly shameful that institutions did not pay more attention in so now. Many individual members of the public go on this site. They take the coordinates of individual megalithic sites across Europe, and particularly in the UK. They talk about those sites. They plan them. They photograph them. They record them. That's a huge resource. And I know I have several masters of PhD students who regularly go and start their research with this. So it's not all that bad in a day, although you want to do like that. Moving to a slightly different kind of arrangement that is to do with crowdsourcing. Here's a famous and globally important, unique kind of venture within the UK. The UK portal I think we'll see. Where it's now recorded about a million finds across the UK. And the map as you see it on the right is the density of those finds across the UK. They're all a lot of major reference. That means that you can place them within, say for example, the nearest square kilometer where they were found. Lots of possible criticisms of this resource. It relies on the goodwill of individual members of the public, but particularly the metal-detecting community, to volunteer the locations, the photographs, et cetera, of finds that can go on the database. And some people would say that's prone to people making things up and all of that sort of thing. But I think most people who would engage with this regularly from, say, an analytical point of view would say, again, this is extremely valuable resource with high quality data at least in parts that you could do an awful lot with from a research perspective. So another example of crowdsourcing finds liaison officers about 25 around the country interacting with various members of the public and metal-detecting communities out of local societies to record finds, information volunteer by the public. So those are two examples just to get you in the mood as to what I mean by crowdsourcing, and particularly crowdsourcing of data collection. I'd make a bold statement and say that we face an unprecedented data deluge today, as archaeologists and historians, that the levels of information flooding into our coffers, if you like, our inventories, is at a scale that hasn't existed before. And we point to all sorts of things. The number of high-velocity circulations of things like spreadsheets documents that people used to catalog things on that are now out there being shared far more than they're used to amongst people working in policy institutions, museums, and universities. That informal, if you like, sharing of information is happening a lot, more than it was before. Add to that seems like a port of antiquity scene, collecting information on a vast scale across the country. It's interesting that the density of finds in port of antiquity scene is 10 times higher than in the only comparable place you could think of where people throw the same amount of effort at national reporting, which is the Netherlands, probably. In the Netherlands, 10 times less density of metal finds. So you can see that there are orders of magnitude different scales of information coming in if you use these schemes. In addition, you've got the rapid rise in the amount of commercial developer-led archaeology, which brings in all sorts of great literature reports of various kinds. You've got things like members of the public putting things on Google Earth, so going online and adding the coordinates of sites just with a hand. You've got the archaeology data service, and a whole range of other things, particularly in remote sensing, the use of satellites, of air photos, of geophysics instruments. The amount of that information coming in is unprecedented in the last five to ten years. All of that presents challenges of storage, of archiving, but we must do something with it as well. So perhaps the primary challenge is an embarrassment of riches. If we don't do anything with that information, then it's slightly shameful. Part of the way, part of the solution, might be, I will suggest, these kinds of crowd-sourcing initiatives. So crowd-based methods get used in a variety of ways. Just to give you a few more, Zooniverse is a famous platform that I mentioned, Galaxy Zoo, that's part of it, but it's a platform based in Oxford. Galaxies are one of the things you can classify on the site, but you can classify pictures of cats and say what kind of cat it is. You can count penguins, how many penguins are in this photograph, because that's scientifically useful. You can transcribe World War I or World War II diaries and other kinds of documents, a whole range of things. They're a project associated with it, such as transcribing the pirate as well, and a whole range more of these. So it's a broadening field. And there are also sites that go into work in the realm of crowdfunding. Remember that's where you're asking for small donations, but I wouldn't help. Something like Big Ventures is an example in this country where whole excavations are funded through this model of crowdfunding. I'll be talking less about crowdfunding and what followed, but mostly about asking for help with the search, really. So what I wanted to talk about, mainly, is a project that is a collaboration between the British Museum and UCL University College London, and has been generously funded by the Arts and Sciences Research Council, so many things to them. And it's been running, I guess, since mid-April 2014, so just under two years. And it's a venture seeking help across a wide range of different possible projects for people interested in history and anthropology, but seeking help with the search data collection. So these are the people involved. Neil Wilkins, who's the British Museum, the curator of the British Museum, Daniel Pett, Chiara Benaki, Jennifer Wexler, as me, and Adi Keene-Squibbett. And on the right-hand side, you've got Daniel Longranya Gonzalez, who also helped with some of the background background, I'll talk about a little bit in a bit. So what do we do with this kind of site? Well, a whole range of things. So I'm going to rattle through them just to give you a sense that this is meant to be multi-domain, if you like. That's a weird term basically meant to say it's not just transcribing one thing, or just counting penguins. It's a whole range of different possibilities. And any given archaeological society or museum could ask to be involved and maybe get some of their resources transcribed or otherwise digitized. So here's a good example. One of our core aims was this slightly elderly-looking failure looking photo of a car and catalog cabinet in the British Museum, which is actually quite famous. This is the Bronze Age Implement Index, which was an index of all Bronze Age finds within the United Kingdom, first started in 1913 as a venture. And it has been handed down from, through various people in the British Museum, including people like Stuart Needham and Christopher Hawkes, as a sort of the record, the national record of Bronze Age finds, with 30,000 catalog cards in this collection. Basically a highly scientific resource, but one of limited access, of course. You have to visit the museum and be able to know the order of these catalog cards to be able to use it effectively. For about 15 years, the British Museum has tried to make this more widely available with no success through standard funding schemes. It's tried about five or six times the average. Never would that be a success. We've just finished, I think I've actually got, the last one is online right now, but we're on to the last half draw of transcribing this through micro-class. So those 30,000 cards are now in a database with the image in the next of them, so you get fantastic drawings of all the objects as well. And those are available online, or will be, they are all in the available online and will be even more easily available in the next six months. So that's one kind of project, all done because we served, as they say in the jargon, we placed online each of these cards in sequence and asked three members of the public to transcribe each card. So why three? Well it's a compromise, but basically about quality control. If three people do the same card, you can compare what they've entered onto the computer and any problems you can flag up and the rest you can accept because it's just everyone has agreed about the same information on the card. So one of the challenges of citizen science or citizen humanities is that idea of how do you retain good quality? Well that redundancy practice. Asking members of the public to do the same thing more than once is one of the strategies. So what are we going to do? Well you can see bottom left there as you see it, the card comes up on screen, they can move it around, zoom in, zoom out, they type into the boxes individual things like this is a bronze jacks, it is so long, it's got a pattern on the one side, it's got a loop on the other side etc etc whatever is already on the card and the geo references, well they say the place name is Bogner Regis, zoom into Bogner Regis on the map as you see it bottom left, put a pin in the map and that's a coordinate that gets stored. So long term this allows the same kind of mapping as you saw with the portability scheme. You could map all 30,000 fines across the UK and indeed fusing together the portability scheme which has been running since 2003 and this car catalog which was running until 1990 gives you pretty much the entire exhaustive metal record for the bronze age that exists within the UK so that's quite an important research resource. Another type of activity that we do is create 3D models. The world has changed rapidly in the last two to three days. In the last two to three years 3D models will become a big thing where before they were just a gimmick and the reason that they've become so important is that we can now do thousands of them. It used to be that you'd get a fancy bit of equipment, you'd set it up in a room and you'd point it at a single object and in all day long you'd be firing a laser at it and this would collect a cloud of three dimensional information and you'd store it somewhere special and nobody would really ever use it. It's just too much of a gimmick for museums and universities to use for real research. You can do thousands of objects and that gives you the opportunity to do the same one twice if you want to check and see whether it's changed in shape over time in the museum. You can look at the typologies, all sorts of things. The trick here is that it now works with ordinary focus. So if I were to take a photograph of the camera or these days even with a phone, now we'd take 14 photographs of that chair. That would be enough for you to make a very realistic model of that chair. In color, in 3D, it was measurable to scientific grade measurement. So that's really good and the people, what we ask people online to assist us with this effort is not the photography but an intermediate step which asks them to separate objects from ground. You can see what's right there. An ordinary photo of a bronzed pulse state and on the right an individual member of the public has isolated that object and that makes the process of creating the model really quite quick thereafter. So what was otherwise laborious, that would have taken several hours to do it for all those photographs, happened as quickly because of the help of the public. Anas is a brave world of 3D because you can document pretty much anything you like this way. You can document standing buildings, you can document the fish-borne villa or the central mosaic there as it falls into the hypercourse of the Roman villa. You can document any change in that height through time for conservation purposes. You can look at the taxonomies of typologies and axes, stone axes, metal axes. You can do what I played with which is look at the ear shape of terracotta warriors in China to see whether they exhibit different degrees of individualism or not. Well, strangely they do, but it certainly is there already. Probably didn't need a 3D model for that but it defined more statistically the groupings within those warriors. This is also something that other people are pointing to. So there are other projects out there now which are in Scotland, for example, a quarter project collecting data with the help of the members of the public of 3D monuments, say architecture. It rails bottom right. It's a project to collect 3D data where members of the public go out and collect the photos themselves and then upload them, send them to a site to make the 3D models. We have a site online there with all of our models, hundreds of them, that you can download. You can print them in 3D in plastic or gypsum or whatever you like in colour. You can embed them in a computer game. You can embed them on any other kind of website. They're very userable things and this is the world of digital objects that some people are saying will be a key factor in the museums of the future. In any case, so those are 3D models and transcriptions. Another important way in which this crowd sourcing site might pass enables researchers through the annotation of old photographs. So being able to say who is in that photograph, whether that's Leonard Woolley or whoever it is in the background there. What kind of monument is that? Where is it in the world? All of these things that enhance quality of photographic art, like old photographic art. You can ask members of the public to help with this. Sometimes you're asking that crowd I talked about, so anybody with any kind of background. And sometimes you're asking a community. Maybe people who have a better sense of, in this case, early but at least in excavations of personalities and people. It doesn't really matter whether you're asking 20 people with the real knowledge or 20,000 people with a broader public knowledge. Another thing we're asking people to do is help with colonial hero documents. So I'm interested in a project with collaborators at UCL looking at the spread of rice agriculture across East Asia. And there understanding the spread of rice in the past is partly about understanding its ecological niche in the present. And that niche is best understood in the period before fancy mechanization. In the early stages of colonial documentation is probably the best sweet spot historically speaking. So entering all of the census data, the agricultural statistics, the rainfall data from that period, 19 countries in 30s, is something we ask members of the public to help with. So they help enter that data, so we can make it available. Another example here is amphoras, rowing amphoras. So a resource provided by the University of Southampton, which is fantastic, is, as you see it on your life, those line drawings of amphoras. So all of the different types of amphoras in the Mediterranean and the Roman period and beyond have a drawing and a catalog entry, which any specialist or any general archaeologist working in the region can access for when they're not there on the left. That's already a fantastic resource, already online with the archaeology data service. What we ask members of the public to help with though is to sweep those line drawings, which are bread and butter of archaeology for many, many years, into three-dimensional models. And they only do something that takes about a minute for each model, but that enables us to automate the process of creating what you can see on the screen there, which are three-dimensional models. And you might ask, well, why is that useful? Well, you can suddenly tell capacity for all of them, not just for the one or two which you pour beans into in the museum, to tell the capacity. You can tell all of them. You can tell the center of gravity how it would have handled full or empty as somebody has carried it, how it would break, where it would break in the hold of a ship, all of these sorts of things. And the interesting thing is these typologies of amphorae, they do tell us about the macroeconomics of the Roman world as well. So just to give you a sense of why I personally self-refuse it in them, on the bottom left is the red line is the shape changing amphoras for 1,500 years across the Mediterranean. So over that period, there are a thousand amphora types. They become squatter or thinner over time in different ways. You can see the example from the island of Kiosk, top left. So you can see on Kiosk degrees the amphora starts squat and become elongated over about 700 years. And they, in fact, all amphoras in the Mediterranean do that wherever they're made for about 700 years between 750 BC and 50 BC. And nobody really knows why. But that shape change matches weird things such as the blue is a number of shipwrecks in the Mediterranean. So the macroeconomics of how many shipwrecks you've got matches a weird shape change in the things the ships are carrying. What you could probably do with the size of the ships, their primary contents, and all sorts of other interesting archaeological So remember the public just by helping with that small thing which allows the 3D tweaking of the models create models that can perigate for a whole range of new things which tell us about quite an interesting amount of the problem. Further things that micro class enables, transcription of documents, correspondence, newspapers, so letters. We're looking to transcribe early archives particularly of a very wide rate social network of female excavators across Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, and Egypt in the 1920s and 30s. Things like newsletters from German POW camps in the New Forest and potentially also newspaper recordings of archaeology from various regional newspapers across the UK. We do things that are called pop-up specifications where we just do fun stuff like new gold finds or stuff from Aldervide Gorge which people in at UCL are just recently uncovering. So those are sort of more topical one-offs where members of the public get exposed to very very new finds and for example get to help with it immediately with the production of a 3D model. I think the fine was made last week and already it's something which they can engage with helped with in a variety of ways. So those are just a sense of the range of things that we're trying to cover. We have covered in the last 18 months. We have also tried this which is the other aspect of crowdsourcing, a much smaller experiment from our perspective which was asking members of the public to make donations to community projects online. So a good example was this one here where an existing community project, a very very fine one in terms of discovery project, were working on the foreshore and had done for a very long time but they had a specific project that fell out so outside of their normal remit looking at where it is in London, looking at terms of water taxis as a historical phenomenon and there were a range of volunteers who wanted to look at it specifically and there is enough money to start on our site to to make that project happen just by asking members of the public to contribute. We provide all of the information created by people online for free of course and also under what's called public licensing so anyone who's able to use it in any way they please. They can use it commercially if they wish. They could sell the models that we produce if that's what they really wanted to do. So public licensing of the results and we also provide learning resources. If somebody wants to make a 3D model on their own we provide the tutorials which allow them to do that. This being a sort of I guess you'd say the agreement that you come to essentially if you're asking people to contribute in this manner. Well in the sort of 80 months or so just under two years we've been running what, how, how much have we done? Well 150 different projects within that time period that we could lead in including that 30,000 that's probably the largest single project that the 30,000 bonds that implements. Large numbers of institutional collaboration so with the Egypt Exploration Society, the Palestine Exploration Fund, the Mary Rose Trust, the Petrie Museum, the Atlantic Lee scheme, the Hart Crossville Data Service, Nari University in Japan, the New Forest National Park, Project Embarine which is the University of Mississippi and the American University of Latin Society with a range of other ones to come. So what's the fantastic thing about this is just the amount of opportunity for playing around with other interesting topics with interesting people and institutions as well and of course members of the public are also interacting with people from these institutions. So in terms of multilateral outreach it's an extremely important value. I just want to end with a few comments on a range of things to do with how these sites work in a kind of social sense because really it's all driven by the sociability of it. People want to contribute, they want to chat about archaeology and we want to chat about archaeology so it's a very social endeavor. It's driven to some degree by publicity so this is a chart of just a short period of say six months or so of the number of new registered users on our site. So we've got thousands of registered users who have signed up to contribute but you can see it's the most spiky distribution day by day how many new people come along. So it really depends on how much publicity we've had recently in the media. So when the Guardian writes an article, huge spike of contribution which is wonderful, but then it drops off again and say when the British Museum dogs are out there, there's a spike as well and then it drops off again. And really in a sense that's quite effortful because it means that it's a creature that is fed by the degree to which you can put a message out there and make people interested and when that message goes away then people find other things to do of course. The kinds of people involved are very diverse. You can see bottom left there, they've got a wide range of pages. Also about 75% of the people on the site are not archaeologists by background so they're coming from outside of the archaeological community. Wide range of pages, wide range of places. From that map as you see it, a little bit faded as you can sort of see it, I've taken out London because London is the sort of biggest hub of where people come from to contribute to this site. But otherwise you can see there are very large contributions from people living in accessing internet from all over the world, particularly Europe and the United States, but also Australia and Southeast Asia. Yeah, 75% of people not archaeologists. Another interesting thing to comment on is that as with a lot of different walks of life, including probably when we do ordinary excavations out there in the real world, a few people do most of the work. So this is what they call a skewed distribution of effort and you can't really see it on your screen there, but the top person, Jordan Gann is actually a humanitarian aid worker abroad, but thus this is a sort of interesting thing on a spare time. She's done 17,000, 16,500 tasks on the site and the next person's done 12,500 and it dropped off and then you know by sort of the 10th person it went down to 2,500. So a lot of people can just do five tasks and then they never come back again, which is absolutely wonderful, it's fine. There are a few people that are very committed to this and you can probably find that range of different behaviors if you are running an excavation and you're asking people to help with that too. Not everyone has time for or the willingness to do the same now. I just wanted to finish by discussing some sort of wider debates associated with cloud sourcing. So that's what we've been up to so far. We plan to continue with those projects for the future. Our funding has ceased in terms of that first project and that's as we planned it. This is meant to be a self-sustaining venture where the people involved do it for the love fit and for often for research purposes as well and members of the public continue to be involved and that works out very nicely. We have tentative collaborations with the National Library in Denmark with possibly the Royal Ontario Museum and a range of others in the store, so I'm very happy about that. Just to talk a little bit more broadly, because I think it's worth just throwing ideas out there, there are strengths and weaknesses and major social debates associated with this kind of activity within the UK and beyond and that the types of things that I think are important for policy makers to discuss for people in museums and galleries and societies such as this to be aware of and come to some kind of opinion even if it is agreed. One of them is this. A lot of people would say that crowd sourcing information like this risks undercutting paid work by for example post-doctoral assistants or other research assistants in universities or people employed in museums that by saying we can get this work done by means that do not involve payment, we are undercutting that entire community of archaeologists that is looking for a living wage out of that. So obviously quite a key discussion and a wider societal discussion about the role of volunteer contributions of course, but that's the sort of thing that is happening within the digital world as well. Is it fair that we got the British Museum card catalog digitised in this manner where we were traditionally going to try and pay something to do it? I think it's fair but there's clearly a balance to be struck and so that's a broad debate. Another one would be to do with data security really. We released all this data out into the public domain. I think that's a good thing and that's the bargain you strike if you ask somebody to help you in this manner. That being said of course there are if you're a national inventory keeper there are security issues with some of that. The most famous one would be the coordinates of find spots. So if you provide two members in public exact coordinates of find spots, potentially in today's world they can have a smartphone or a global positioning system such as one top left and where they can find it on Google Earth and then they can go and have a look to see whether they're a matter detectorist or if somebody is out for a picnic. But they can have a look with all the strengths and weaknesses and risks to the archaeology of them having a closer look at exactly where something was found. When we for example ask people to georeference the find spot on these parts of the Bronze Age axis found in the past are we encouraging or metal detecting in more places? I don't think we are. I don't think the coordinates are accurate enough for that. I'd say they were nearly as long as most of the time but it's a discussion of people I haven't. And of course simply by giving people access to all this information we are trusting them to take on a certain stewardship role rather than assuming that they would do bad things. So one last thing you know about this is a lot of what we're doing with this kind of project in terms of georeferencing that is placening accurately in the world the find spots of things. That's only possible in the last 10 years really. The technology didn't exist to enable people to do that. So a massive shift in terms of our ability to do what I love doing which is spatial analysis of things. So the analysis of spatial distributions, distribution maps here, distribution maps there, the better butter of archaeology for 100 years but something that can use much more effective than that. And it's part of this brand new world of much easier positioning in the world. Any individual member of the public could give you this georeferencing capability that before only a few specialists would be able to provide. Lastly as you can imagine there's a sort of why you're debating that and what people call open and closed knowledge. So may have heard of debates about open access to journals and other kinds of publications in the academic world. Whether or not for example you can read an article online or download it or whether you have to pay for that privilege. Obviously it's only wealthy institutions that pay for that privilege so there's a wider discussion as to whether everything should be open access in the academic world. People also talk about open data these days that if I create a spreadsheet of some information, a database, that too should be available to members of the public. People even talk about software. The software must be open by which they mean most people that couldn't care less. But the code that builds the software whether that's going to be open as well. For what it's worth not everyone's interested in this but all of the software we use is non-commercial and open source. That means we either build it ourselves or we borrow it from people who are also providing these things openly. Which means there are now five other institutions that use similar software to us. We won't claim all the credit because some of it existed before it. But for example the National Library in Israel the British Library here in London and about three others are using the same combination of software as we do. Some of which we have built and some of which we have built before we came along. That's part of that sharing world of software as well. And finally methods being able to say to somebody out there if you help us we will show you the method by which you personally can build these 3D models in your home. That transparency method is also something that people are talking about a lot today. So that's really where I'll leave it. This is a face to the back data that I raised at the beginning. Quantitative information that I had to store but also slightly bewildering in terms of what we do with them. Well in some sense some of this crowd sourcing I've been talking about only adds to that problem because it just creates more of this kind of digital data. But it also potentially offers a solution which is that we can list the help of members of the public to do a lot of the tasks that make this data richer and more usable than what we ever had before. So that collective work being on search data is I think a key frontier for the future and then I'll leave it.