HMRC!!!

I see that the government has apparently managed to lose the personal details of around 25 million people in the UK. Just to put that into perspective, that’s the personal details of around 40% of the population!

Then, just to rub salt into the wound they give you a help line to call that they actually get a cut of the proceeds from!

Unfortunately, many people have been telling the government for a very long time that putting everyone on massive databases is not necessarily a good thing to do. The more information you have in a single place, the more likely it is to be targeted by the criminal element in our society and the more likely it is that a mishap will have massive repercussions!

Unfortunately, our current leaders (and I use that term in its loosest possible sense) seem to believe that they know best and so refuse to listen to anyone who’s opinions differ from theirs!

Personally, I believe that your average 14 year old could probably tell you why big databases are a bad thing and anyone who has ever had to work with even a moderate sized database will know of the pitfalls and problems as should the government given the number of errors that regularly get reported in the press.

So why won’t the government listed? Well that is the million pound question I’m afraid…

And to think, they want to put all out medical records, personal details and identities on massive databases that will be accessed by millions of people daily. Am I the only one who can see where this will go?

Another cycling clamdown comes to nothing!

It’s now been approximately four weeks since Cambridgeshire Police announced its latest campaign against dangerous cyclists in the city.

For those of you who have never had the joy of cycling in Cambridge let me set the scene… Casual observation will quickly confirm that in the city centre only around 30% of the bikes you see will have working lights, of those a sizeable proportion will have the lights they do have obscured by long coats, guitars, sports equipment or stuff in their basket. Then there are those that get a little confused and put red lights on the front of the bike.

On a good day, the proportion of cyclists with lights may increase to as much as 60% when you get out of town, but that is on a good day. Most days you struggle to see more than 50% of cyclist with lights on at all.

Add to this the fact that most cyclists wear dark clothing and ignore red lights, pedestrian crossings, junctions or one way streets and you can see why on average “One cyclist a week is either killed or seriously injured on Cambridgeshire roads”.

As I said at the beginging of this rant, approximately 4 weeks ago, Cambridgeshire’s finest announced their latest clamdown on city cyclists. We were told that "In the coming weeks the police will be increasing the number of special constables and PCSOs out targeting cyclists who don't use lights”.

At this point in time I have to say that I am assuming that the operation is now over (if it ever started) as I have yet to see anyone get stopped for riding without lights or any other infraction for that matter.

Actually this comes as no surprise really as Cambridgeshire Police seem to have two or three ‘crackdowns’ a year and in all my years in Cambridge I have only ever seen two people pulled over.

Unfortunately the lack of respect for the highway code and dangerous riding continues unabated in this fair city and I suppose its only a matter of time before someone else is killed or injured.

Perhaps someone should buy Cambridgeshire’s Chief Constable a copy of the book “The boy who Cried Wolf” for Christmas?

The information age..

Many of you will have read the stories today where the information commissioner has come out and lambasted lots of organisations (Banks, Mobile phone companies, government departments to name just a few) about data security. If you haven't the story can be read here http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=422183&in_page_id=2&ct=5 or here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6289410.stm

What he basically says is that large organisations are not very good at safeguarding all the personal data they hold on us.

Obviously this will come as no surprise to anyone who has ever worked with IT systems. It is far easier to let someone else pop onto your computer and access something than to log off, make them log on and then log on again yourself. And this data should come as no surprise to the government since a similar report a couple of years ago pointed out that approximately 30,000 NHS staff routinely shared log on details.

Why people don't take more care is a mystery to me personally, having worked for an organisation where people would love to log on using someone else's password and send the MD an e-mail or tell customers the truth about products. Unfortunately I suppose its like checking bank statements, no one really takes any notice of it until they get caught out!

What is slightly more worrying is that the government are to shortly start compiling a national database of people's identities and you really have to ask yourself exactly how safe this database will really be???

Airport security...

I know that unless you've been living in a cave for the last week or so you'll all be aware of the recent terrorist attacks carried out in the UK (both successful and unsuccessful).

Therefore it came as no surprise when I recently flew between Stanstead and Edinburgh the heightened state of alert at these two airports and I was not surprised to see that no one is now allowed to set down in front of either airport any more.

What did surprise me somewhat though was the fact that I was allowed to carry an open bottle of Lucozade sport through security without anyone questioning anything.

OK it was an accident and I didn't realise I had the drink in my bag at the time but the fact that the tray was given a good going over by the scanner operator made the lapse in security very surprising.

Cycling in Cambridge

A few months ago I moved house which means that I now have a 3 mile cycle ride into work every morning. To be honest I actually like cycling and find it very therapeutic but I have found that over the last week or so I have also had to relearn the rules of the road as applied to cyclists in this lovely town of Cambridge…

Now we all know that road users have to follow certain rules on the roads to keep themselves and others safe and these rules are printed in the “Highway Code”. It appears that the Highway Code used in Cambridge is slightly different to that used by the rest of the country and to be honest I’m finding it all very confusing.

For example, in Cambridge it appears that red traffic lights are only there for information and at best they only apply to powered vehicles. Pedestrians and cyclists are allowed to ignore red lights altogether and frequently do. This obviously also applies to pelican and puffin crossings too!

Another good example is the fact that cyclist do not need to give way when joining a main road from a side street. In fact this rule change is so well entrenched that it is not even necessary for cyclists to look for other road users when performing this manoeuvre as the onus is firmly on the other road users to allow the cyclist to pull out. The only stipulation seems to be that the cyclist must cycle slowly when pulling out AND when cycling up the road they have just joined.

Also, did you know that there is an unofficial maximum speed limit for cycling in Cambridge of 7 mph???

Now I know what you are thinking and that is that its just the new students getting used to cycling instead of having mummy or daddy run them to school in the morning, but alas this is not the case and young and old alike act the same way so it MUST be a different Highway Code?

Still, it makes cycling to work and back “interesting” if a little terrifying at times…

THe most stupid question ever????

Today I heard the most ridiculous question ever asked of a politician…

Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 asked Gordon Brown whether anyone had thought about the carbon footprint of the bombs used in the war in Iraq before we went to war!!!!?

I’m sure that was exactly what the Iraqi’s were thinking as the US bombed their country back to the Stone Age!

All I’d like to say is it’s a good job that depleted uranium doesn’t contribute to global warming.

"What’s that sound? Oh it’s more depleted uranium falling on me. At least it’s not carbon!! Look at that, my garden now glows in the dark… that’ll save on electricity… oh hang on, we haven’t got any of that either!!!"

Some people really do have a very tenuous grasp on reality at times!

Run Like Hell

My fave band performs their greatest track in the rain. I was there...

Its fun to be a Halifax customer

Another story that caught my eye last week was the news the Halifax hopes to ban millions of their customers from visiting their Halifax branch.

Apparently the Halifax is trailing a scheme where holders of their Basic bank accounts are asked not go into their Halifax Branch but to contact the bank through telephone banking, over the Internet or through ATM machines.

Ironically, these are the very customers most in need of face to face banking that they are doing this to. The customers least likely to have access to the Internet. The customers least likely to be able to afford the higher 0845 telephone charges. The customers most likely to be forced to use fee paying cash machines!

But I’m sure Halifax are trying this for a reason that is good for all its customers, or you would hope so at least, wouldn’t you? Well alas not. The reason for this approach is that the Basic Account customers are an inconvenience to their more important customers, i.e. those who they make the most money out of!

Well at least we now know exactly what the Halifax really thinks about its customers, don’t we!

Makes me glad I’m moving my mortgage away from Halifax now :o)

Do you own it or do you not?

A little off of my usual tact but a friend of mine had an interesting entry on his Blog about a recent court case in the US concerning Lexmark.

Apparently the case centers on Lexmark claiming that anyone who buy a cartridge off of them (offered at a discount) enters into a contract to return the spent cartridge to Lexmark rather than get it refilled by other means.

From what I can gather it is based on the same ideals that govern most software purchased these days, i.e. by opening the software you agree to be bound by their terms and conditions. In this case I believe they have argued that opening the box signifies that you agree that the cartridge shall only be used once and then returned to Lexmark.

So I wonder how long it will be before every new car has a seal on the drivers door that states that by breaking the seal you agree to only fit proprietry (and over priced) parts to your car? Or toasters with seals on that say you will only toast Mothers Pride bread in them?

Being serious for a moment, this ruling basically turns on its head the notion that when you purchase something you own it! Apparently now you merely license it and never actually own it?

Right, I’m off to toast a bagel or two in my toaster.

Its time for another oil company protest...

With the continued high oil prices, which have been reflected in the high price of petrol, the now traditional e-mail suggesting that we boycott some of the large oil companies (in this case BP and ESSO) has started to circulate. As in the past the suggesting is that we simply stop buying petrol from these two companies, which will hopefully send a message to all oil companies that enough is enough!

Now I think this idea is workable and it is admirable that there are some people out there who actually think enough is truly enough and are willing to do something about the blatant profiteering the oil companies are engaged in.

Alas I also believe that there are a greater number of people out there who are just too lazy to do anything about it, other than to moan incessantly about the cost of fuel. For years now we have had these protests pop up from time to time and every time one is started nothing happens. You go past the intended targets petrol stations and they are as busy as ever and the oil companies know this.

The only way a protest like this will ever have an effect is if people actually take it seriously and act upon it. It can work and has worked in the past but everyone needs to play his or her part. Unfortunately the lazy people are content to let everyone else do their part for them, which is why this protest, just like those before it is destined to fail.

Surprisingly I have even heard from one or two people out there who defend the actions of these oil companies so I though I’d spend a few minutes expressing my point of view on this…

I believe that the intended point of this little protest (for little is all that it will be), is not to destroy the likes of BP or ESSO, but to send a message to all those involved in fleecing the motorist that enough is enough! We are fed up with all the taxes associated with using our cars as well as the high running costs when no one will provide a viable alternative solution to the problem of car usage. We have had 20 years of social conditioning telling us that the car is good with little investment in any alternative transportation and policy shows no signs of changing any time soon.

And why should policy change? The oil companies and car makes make huge profits and the government reap the rewards of this in the form of tax incomes whilst giving very little back. As long as we sit here and take it who is to blame for everyone else taking the cream off of the top?

Anyway if you believe the rhetoric that is frequently spouted by the likes of BP, ESSO, Shell, Q8, Fina, etc. etc., then they all sell petrol to us at a loss, so our not buying any would actually be a benefit to them!

Someone did point out that oil companies investing a lot of money in finding alternative resources and fuels and that I have to agree with this, but I do not believe for one moment that it is out of some loyalty to you and I. For years these same companies suppressed the very investment we are now thanking them for.

The oil industry exists with one purpose and one purpose only and that is to make money. We all know that eventually the oil will run out and if the like of BP and ESSO are to continue to make a profit on this day, then they will have to have an alternative ready, hence the investment.

With high oil prices, the oil industry makes ever-higher profits so these companies can afford to spend as much or as little on future investment as they chose. If in 20 years time no alternative to petrol has been found and we all end up walking everywhere, do you seriously believe that anyone in these huge multinational companies will shed a tear for us? Just as long as the profits continue to roll in BP would be happy selling cheese!