A 66-year-old is set to become the oldest woman to give birth in Britain, it was reported last night.

Elizabeth Adeney is reported to be eight months pregnant after having had IVF treatment abroad.

She is four years older than the previous record holder, Patricia Rashbrook, who gave birth in 2006, aged 62.

Hooray for science!

Patton Oswalt is not safe for work or around the kids…

…well, take a look for yourself.

Twitter, as we all know, is ace. You can have all sorts of fun with it. One of its features is that it keeps an eye on what its users are talking about and keeps a list of what it calls ‘trending topics’. When a group of like-minded souls got together this afternoon to discuss the twattery of the British National Party, the discussion managed to dislodge Star Trek as the most talked about topic on Planet Twitter. In your face, Spock.

Get yourself over there and join in the fun. Just add the hashtag #theBNParetwats to your twitters.

Simple pleasures.
 

Every so often I wish out loud that there was a nice way of formatting blog posts so you could print them out as a little magazine. You could then read them on the bus or the bog and leave them behind for someone else to find.

It looks like with its Tabbloid service, Hewlett Packard might have cracked it. You give it a blog’s RSS feed (or several), your email address and a delivery time and it sends you a daily and nicely formatted PDF of that blog’s posts. A little jiggery-pokery at this end to trim out the stuff that doesn’t translate to paper – like Twitter feeds – and it could be a very nice little toy.

(Via Warren Ellis)

It seems to me that there’s a perverse dichotomy in New Labour’s approach to science. On some issues it is firmly anti-science and on others it embraces science like a lover.

For instance, if you are an independent advisory body who has ‘probably carried out the most considered and detailed assessment of ecstasy ever carried out’, the government is going to tell you to go swing when you produce your recommendations. Ecstasy is a potential killer says the government so it stays as a Class A drug.

However, if you’re a scientist whose particular itch is finding new and interesting ways of killing people with sharp and shiny weaponry, then the government will throw millions at you and produce hot ‘n’ horny press releases oozing luuuurve for your engines of death.

What I’m sensing here is that the government doesn’t like you taking voluntary risks with your own body in a UK nightclub but if you’re, say, living in Afghanistan’s Helmand province, they’ll impose the risk on you. Can anybody square this for me?

And no, one of them isn’t ‘off’ in response to his staggeringly half-arsed plan to censor the Internet.

The two words are prior restraint.

Still, Mr Burnham can scratch the itch of his technocratic authoritarianism all he likes but if this plan actually happens (who decides what’s ‘unacceptable’ and what isn’t? Does every website in the world have to join a queue to have a rating applied? Doesn’t Burnham know that technology already exists to protect children from inappropriate content?), I’ll show my bum in the window of Marks and Spencer.

The fact that Burnham had to wait until the Saturday between Christmas and New Year to get himself a hearing on this should tell you all you need to know about how seriously to take him.

Right here.

Can anybody else hear ‘Whitey on the Moon‘ by Gil Scott-Heron?

(Via John Brissenden)

Alex Harrowell is ace on the fabulous lie detectors that are going to stop the underclass dragging us all to the poorhouse:

I wonder if Harrow council is aware that exactly the same technology is being marketed as a “Love Detector”?

In case you hadn’t already guessed, this ‘voice risk analysis technology’ being brought in to trap dole scum is the most spectacular bollocks. It’s a bogeyman to intimidate the vulnerable.

Is Bloglines knackered? My account hasn’t updated all day and it did the same yesterday.

Anybody recommend me another decent RSS reader (not Google Reader or Netvibes)? Ta.

To live to see such wondrous things, eh? Do you know how long I’ve dreamed of having a monkey that would bring me a beer?

I’d given up on ever realising my dream. I had to resign myself having kids instead. It’s a poor second, I can tell you.

It’s not all down, down, down in the news right now: some things are up, up, up…

The number of those sleeping rough: UP!

The number of Afghan civilians killed by the Taleban and Nato: UP!

The number of people killed by Clostridium difficile: UP!

I just wanted to say that, if things go badly this morning, I’ve always loved you.

Is Julie Moult an idiot? - Number 2 with a bullet - click to enlarge

And that, Julie Moult, is how it’s done.

Is Julie Moult an idiot? That’s the question concerned bloggers are asking today after Daily Mail ‘journalist’ Julie Moult wrongly accused the mighty Beau Bo d’Or of ‘googlebombing’ (without understanding in the slightest what ‘googlebombs’ are or how they work despite, and this is the kicker, having it explained to her by people from Google). This isn’t the first time Julie Moult has let the facts get in the way of a story, as Tim points out.

As a kindly way of showing Julie Moult just how Google actually works, it was Tim’s idea to put himself and others in the top ten Google results for ‘Julie Moult’ and to demonstrate how quickly it can be done. Hopefully soon, this blog post will rank highly for searches for ‘Julie Moult’. The image at the top should eventually feature in the Google Image searches for ‘Julie Moult’.

If you’d like to join the fun, just follow Tim’s simple instruction…

Step One – Create an image featuring the words “Julie Moult is an idiot” (or “Julie Moult is not an idiot, but instead a much-misunderstood campaigner for truth and a very nice person once you get to know her”).

Step Two – Include the words ‘julie’ and ‘moult’ in the filename for your image.

Step Three – Publish it on your website or weblog in a post explaining what it is and why it’s there (including, if you like, these steps and a link back to this article).

Step Four (optional) – If you really mean business, put her name in your article title and maybe even drop in some ‘ALT’ or ‘Title’ goodness for your image.

:: Please keep in mind that Julie Moult might be willing and able to sue you if she can prove that she isn’t an idiot (though I’m quietly confident that this won’t be a problem).

:: You may also wish to include a picture/glimpse of yourself in your image so Julie is certain that real people, not invisible Google pixies, lurk behind the eventual results.

Notable search results will be posted [on Tim's blog] as soon as they start appearing, and a prize will be awarded for the best relevant performance in Google Images (not including mine).

Good luck to you all. I hope to see you in the top row soon.

Jacqui ‘chins’ Smith on the loss of yet more sensitive data:

This was data that was being held in a secure form, but was downloaded onto a memory stick by an external contractor

BZZZZT! Wrong answer.

Memo to Ms Smith: If you have a system that allows some herbert to download information from it to a memory stick and then go out and lose said memory stick, THAT INFORMATION IS NOT IN A ‘SECURE FORM’. This system is, like so many, many others, is bollocks.

Is Smith ignorant or is she relying on the ignorance of the public here? I think probably both – Smith gives every impression of being genuinely witless on this matter and that, by lucky chance, allows her bad news masseurs to befuddle the ‘ee, I don’t understand computers, me’ public.

Defence Minister Bob Ainsworth is a happy chappy:

I am pleased to inform the House that the Ministry of Defence has concluded a teaming agreement with the industrial grouping known as Team CW to take forward, to the next stage, the Government’s intentions for the UK complex weapons sector

In other words, the armed forces are going to be getting a new consignment of hot death. The Indirect Fire Precision Attack Loitering Munition is my favourite:

The Loitering Munition is so called because it gets fired off into the sky and then lurks about for up to ten hours. At any time, it can be ordered to suddenly plunge down onto a target and explode. If no target crops up, it will self-destruct before running out of fuel.

I can’t wait to see the failure rates on these babies. That said, footage of parents dragging their dead kids out of wrongly bombed houses has never had that much effect on arms manufacturers shareprices (or consciences).

(Link via Matt Wardman)

Ladies and gentlemen, be upstanding, let your chest and pudenda swell with national pride…

WE’RE NUMBER ONE!

Number one with a bullet, in fact. Finally, we’ve rediscovered the thing we’ve been historically best at: inflicting misery, death and pain. Britain, the world’s most successful merchant of death.

We can’t manufacture anything else worth a damn but if you want to kill somebody, we’re your go-to guy with very, very few questions asked.

I can’t shake the simultaneously amusing and horrifying image of Gordon Brown fluttering his eyelids coquettishly at Saudi torturers, bending over and looking back over his shoulder with a finger to his pouting lips as King Abdullah counts bank notes onto the nightstand. Picture David Miliband in a tight dress breathlessly mouthing ‘I want to be loved by you‘ to Ehud Olmert.

Anyway, to celebrate this historic day I’m going to try to sell a carving knife to the nutter up the street. What could be more symbolic of British success?

Can anybody put a name to this little fellow, currently patrolling the potatoes out back? I used to be quite the entomologist when I was a nipper but I’ve never seen one with a red waistcoat before.

Friend or foe? Nurture him or knacker him?

(And yes, the macro function on my camera is a bit iffy.)

So, anyway. You’re never going to believe this but I think I have discovered the cure for cancer. Are you ready?

It’s sherbet.

That’s right. If you eat sherbet for 42 days, it could prevent you from getting cancer. Now, pre-eminent oncologists and many other medical experts, dentists and the like, are disputing this but I have to say to them that the threat from cancer is current and it is growing. It is grave and exceptional. Of course there are other treatments for cancer but they are a lot more difficult and expensive. And unpopular.

There are those that say 42 days of sherbet could exacerbate the problem – make the cancer worse – but I say that it would be negligent of me not to look to any and all methods in the fight against this scourge. If there is a chance sherbet could prevent a growth in cancer then we should use it.

Despite reports of widespread opposition to the plans, there are important and influential figures who have welcomed them. The producers and sellers of sherbet have warmly greeted the initiative knowing it will allow them to perform their jobs much more easily. Not better as such or more efficiently, you understand, but one cannot expect everything in these uncertain times. They have their overtime forms already filled out.

Many of my friends and and family have been sceptical about this measure that I’m introducing but I believe, now that they’ve had it explained to them that their personal wellbeing is on the line, they have come around to my way of thinking. I sense the ground is shifting.

Of course, if 42 days of sherbet proves to be inadequate, we can increase the treatment to 56 or even 90 days and beyond. People will – understandably – want to know the facts behind the reasoning for this unusual measure but I say this to them: you don’t need to know and I’m not telling. Scrutiny rhymes with mutiny, y’know.

I know opinions on issues like stem cell research and abortion are pretty entrenched and unlikely to sway to any significant degree. But take a look at the time being given to the debates of the more contentious elements of the human fertilisation and embryology bill…

Hybrid embryos

The debate starts today at 3.30pm BST, with the first crunch vote, on hybrid embryos, expected three hours later at about 6.30pm.

‘Saviour siblings’

The debate [...] is likely to take place tomorrow from 6.30pm, with a vote around 9.45pm.

The role of fathers in fertility treatment

The debate is expected to start around 3.30pm tomorrow, with a vote around 6.30pm.

Abortion

Debate will start around 6.30pm tomorrow, with votes from about 9.30pm.

You can see why they need to rush it all through. MPs have got a busy week before they all get to bugger off on Thursday night. It’ll also be interesting to see how much time the Committee on the grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals gets in the Commons chamber on Wednesday.

It took me ten minutes to write to my MP asking her not to vote for any amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill that seeks to reduce the abortion time limit from 24 weeks.

I’d like to suggest you do the same.

I love Twitter, the teeny tiny blogging platform. You get just 140 characters to post a link, a one-line joke, your mood, or whatever. The need for brevity and economy of language is a useful little mental exercise that can sharpen your writing and also produce a nice turn of phrase.

You can follow other Twitterers and interact/chat/argue with them. My Twitter feed is a one stop shop for nearly everything I do on the web. It amalgamates my posts from this blog, the photos on my moblog, and my link dump from del.icio.us, as well as being my miscellaneous brain dump, scratch pad and bullshit bucket.

As well as being a microblogging tool and a instant messenger doohicky, it’s also a great resource. You can sign up for updates from BBC News, Downing Street, and even the local weather. Third party software tools like Twhirl or Tweetr will squeak at you when new updates are posted by those feeds you are following.

I also follow the updates from Lib Dems. I suggested today that their Twitter feed was an automatic service or ‘bot’. Twitter is being rapidly infiltrated by spammers – who can easily be beaten – and I was rashly suspicious that the Liberals has resorted to similar nefarious tactics.

I’m glad to say I was wrong – I was sent categoric proof. The Lib Dem Twitter feed passes the Turing Test with flying colours.

Unless their publicity budget stretches to producing frighteningly realistic human simulacrums, that is.

Anyway, you should go and give Twitter a go. Let me know if you do and/or recommend me some good Twitter feeds. I’ll recommend Donald Strachan, Mike Power, and Robert Mugabe. And the very nice man on the end of the Lib Dem feed who isn’t a robot.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s giving one of those newly-fangled webchat things on April 17.

I’ve got a reasonable record on getting my questions asked of (if not exactly answered by) the Greater Good on these occasions. Margaret Hodge, David Miliband and even Tony Blair himself have failed to give adequate answers to questions submitted by me in the past.

So, let us address our concerns to the Home Secretary. I’ll award some form of prize for the best question submitted in the comments that actually gets asked of the Home Secretary.

Hey kids, ever wondered how new technology can help kill and maim people? Well, now’s your chance to find out!

Future soldier – from fiction to the frontline
Holographic quantum technology and acoustic sniper sensors may sound like the stuff of science fiction films – but they are actually new defence technologies which could soon be destined for the battlefield.

They were just a few of the gadgets and technologies on show at the Future Soldier event, held today at London’s National Army Museum to coincide with National Science and Engineering Week (7-16 March).

It’s a hearts and minds strategy to make our brave boys out in Iraqistan green with envy!

John Howe CB OBE, Vice Chairman of Thales UK, one of the industry sponsors of the event said:

“This is a marvellous opportunity to show young people how exciting science and technology are. Thales has world class capability in soldier systems, as the examples on display here today demonstrate.”

Soldier systems are marvellous, aren’t they? And exciting. That was exactly the emotion I felt looking at those pictures of that Iraqi kid with no arms. Excited.

Sir Kevin Tebbit, formerly part of the crew that outed Dr David Kelly and now Chairman of Finmeccanica UK, is boastful his company’s ‘vital role in support of the UK’s international security policy’:

We produce high quality equipment, have world beating technology, applied by a talented and dedicated work force…

You could certainly beat the world with a bunch of Finmeccanica’s ammunition or a brace of Target Drones. Or at least leave big parts of it feeling rather sore.

For budding young merchants of death and teenage fans of the old whizz-bang-AARGH! there are even resources for their teachers:

The MoD also provides support to teachers to deliver science and other key curriculum lessons via the free, online Defence Dynamics teaching resource. Covering themes as diverse as mapping, flooding, genetic engineering and survival skills.

All this use of the word ‘defence’ as a euphemism for firing hot and sharp pieces of metal into people’s bodies at high velocity. Not that there’ll be any explicit mention of the end result of ‘Defence Dynamics’ and ‘Soldier systems’. It doesn’t do to dwell on the effects on those on the receiving end, after all.

And co-opting kids into it, as well. Does that sound a bit creepy to you? Worry not.

[L]essons not only apply theory in the real world but also encourage students to debate the moral issues behind the introduction of new technology.

Even it if just kids as part of an indoctrination programme, thank God somebody is debating the moral issues. Maybe the arms dealers have outsourced it to them.

It’s difficult to know where to stand on the issue of water fluoridation. After listening to two days worth of pro- and anti- ‘experts’ shouting at each other on the radio, I’m still none the wiser.

Advocates insist that we need fluoride in the water if we’re not all to end up with cakeholes like Shane MacGowan. Those who are against say better that than bone cancer. Either alternative seems to have a grotty, unpleasant outcome.

Health Secretary Alan Johnson insists that ‘prevention is better than cure’. Fluoride in the water means fewer trips to the dentist. And with there being fewer and fewer NHS dentists these days, you can see why Alan might be keen.

When you think about it, adding chemicals to the water supply could cure all manner of ills. First, we should add Prozac to the water coolers on the floors of stock exchanges across the world, to stop the traders feeling gloomy and bringing about the self-fulfilling prophesy of a global financial crash.

Then it has to be LSD in the water supply for the general population – to make us all think we live in a magical wonderland where everyone is happy and performing their designated role with the optimum economic efficiency. Think of the money we could save on PR, spin doctors and all the other professional liars who are paid to tell us we’ve never had it so good and not to worry. Prevention is better than cure after all.

One of the side-effects of an excess intake of fluoride is apparently increased docility. Whether that’s a good or a bad thing depends on where you stand. Personally, I hope Alan Johnson’s hands don’t shake when he’s adding the recommended dosage down at the water treatment plant.

Still not so worried about ID cards and their attendant massive database? Then how about this. This week’s Private Eye publishes extracts from Nick Davies’ Flat Earth News, ‘[a]n explosive expose of the corruption entrenched in today’s media:

Reporters from the Mail to whom I spoke independently agreed that they had bribed not only police officers but also civil servants. For example, they targeted officials who had access to the massive database of the social security system, which registers the personal details of every British citizen with a national insurance number and every foreign national with a right to work in Britain – some 72 million private citizens. One reporter who has now left the paper recalled: ‘We used to use the social security computer as if it was an extension of the Daily Mail library. You phone your contact, have a chat, say you’re looking for such-and-such a guy, this age, rough location – is there any chance? Keep chatting. He says, “Oh, we’ve got five people of that name.” You say, “Well, givegive me all five.” You get home addresses, phone numbers, maybe workplace too. They get you information off the database, and you reward them with a dirty great meal or an envelope.’

Now, under the terms of the Identity Card Act 2006, if a person with access to the Identity Register who ‘provides any person with information that he is required to keep confidential’ can face ‘imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or [...] a fine. or [...] both’.

Why aren’t similar safeguards in place for the social security database? If not, why not? If they are, why aren’t they being enforced or acting as an adequate deterrent? Unless these provisions are made to provide the illusion of security for the public (see also, the towers of anti-terrorism legislation). There do seem to be measures of some sort in place. Davies again:

At one point, according to one Mail source, a reporter in the newsroom was bribing a Ministry of Defence police office who could access several databases, including Scotland Yard’s. Mail reporters separately claim that they also had regular access to what is arguably the most sensitive of all confidential information, the health records of some of their targets. As one Mail veteran put it to me: ‘If the Mail‘ go for you, they get every phone number you have dialled, every schoolmate, everything on your credit card, every call to your phone and to your mobile. Everything.’ Even if it is against the law.

My emphasis. This isn’t rocket science. Proper security would merely mean having to log every access to the database. That will take huge amounts of computer storage but, frankly, tough. Do it right or not at all. Then, if a person complains that their personal details have reached the public domain, it’s a simple procedure to review the access logs to see who’s been looking at that person’s details.

If the accesser doesn’t have a good reason, then it’s suspension, a trial and possibly ‘imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or [...] a fine. or [...] both’. You could sketch this idea on a napkin and have a small prototype system running in an afternoon. I should be in management consultancy.

The vital ingredient in this plan, of course, is political will. The will to implement the measures. The will to provide the resources to monitor and enforce the measures. And the will to prosecute transgressors. Oh, and a newspaper or two having the balls to a) shun these practices and b) blow the whistle on law-breaking rivals. Good luck.

Remember all this the next time you see a government minister defending the overall safety of our personal information. And remember all this the next time you see the Daily Mail bleating about the government losing our data and it maybe ending up in the wrong hands. We now know whose hands some of that data is ending up in.