David Bradley – Page 270

Sciencebase Upgraded

UPDATE: Since I wrote this post back in February 2008, WordPress has gone through many changes, updates on Sciencebase are automated these days too, which is marvellous.

I finally upgraded the Sciencebase site to the very latest version of WordPress, it had been languishing at version 2.1.3 (can you believe it?) for far too long. There had not only been dozens of security upgrades since that version and the current version 2.3.3 but various new features that the site was not making full use of.

It was a post by Wayne Liew WayneLiewDot.com that persuaded me to do the necessary and his recommendation for using a plugin that automates that whole process was the tipping point I needed.

Having carried out the upgrade (more on the actual WordPress upgrade process here) and found only a few minor problems, like a disordered sidebar, a couple of out-of-date plugins and just one irrelevant dead plugin, and fixed those as best as I could, I figured it was time for a weekend break. So my wife and I headed off to the seaside, abandoned the children with their grandparents and took off with the dog for a well-earned break at an artsy country town on the Suffolk coast. (Photos will appear soon on the Sciencebase Flickr account). Hence this trivial and possibly pointless post.

Back with a more substantial science based post later this week.

Giving the Ghetto Blaster Retro Chic

iPod Ghetto Blaster

The ongoing quest for bigger, better, smaller, faster gadgets and other consumer products is not environmentally sustainable and must be replaced by an approach to design that builds on the products of contemporary mass-produced culture by re-working them for current desires. That is the simple message offered by Stuart Walker of the Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Canada, currently Co-Director of Imagination@Lancaster at Lancaster University, UK, writing in the current issue of the International Journal of Sustainable Design.

Walker points out that it is critical that we address issues of sustainability more substantially than has been done to date. The throwaway culture of the mp3 generation is not only filling landfills with mass-produced and almost disposable products, but wasting vast quantities of potentially recoverable materials, including precious metals. Moreover, the continued greed for novelty means that countless perfectly useful gadgets and other products are being discarded in favour of the next version much sooner than they need be given the robustness of many well-designed products today.

He adds that if design is to contribute to human culture in a more meaningful way then it has to move beyond the often shallow, style-based notions of product design that have become so prevalent over the last 50 years.

If the creation of new products is part of the problem rather than the solution to sustainability in a world of climate change, overburdened landfills and dwindling supplies of inexpensive mineral resources, then does the designer have a role if consumerist society were to desist from its quest for novelty?

“On the face of it, and within the conventional parameters of product design, it would seem that the answer would be no,” says Walker, “or at most, relatively little.” However, he suggests that a broadening of definitions of what design involves could lead to a new generation in design that exists not simply to create novel products but to use the creative skills of individuals to re-work old products.

Walker takes as a case in point the “old-fashioned” stereo radio-cassette player, which had its heyday in the ghetto blasters of the 1980s. Countless ghetto blasters will have hit landfills in the decades since and yet, with a little imagination, a once prized possession could become a new outlet for a portable mp3 player with a simple rewiring of the input circuitry.

Such re-purposing may not be fashionable, there is not at present any cachet nor retro-chic associated with the ghetto blaster as generation after generation of sleek touch-sensitive portable media gadgets hit the market month in, month out. And yet it would take only a few cultural innovators seeing the potential of this and other examples for rebuilding and repurposing to lead to a consumer tipping point in which such a primal approach to recycling became the height of fashion. Being an early adopter need not mean buying the latest gadget, it could simply mean repurposing an old one.

More information on Walker’s potentially revolutionary proposals can be found in “Extant objects: designing things as they are” Int. J. Sustainable Design, 2008, 1, pp 4-12

You can leave ideas for other potentially retro chic repurposed gadgets and products in the comment form below.

Did Your Doctor Inhale?

Cannabis red light - adapted from http://www.flickr.com/photos/aforero/434623972/

A survey of medical students in Brazil found that more than 80% use alcohol, while cannabis use is limited to about one in four, a quarter use solvents and just over 25% use tobacco. In contrast, less than three quarters of female medical students use alcohol, just under 15% use tobacco, about 10 percent use solvents, and tranquillizer use accounts for 7.5%.

The survey carried out using World Health Organisation criteria questioned 456 medical students across the grades. Details will appear in the March issue of the journal Addict Behav (2008, 33(3), pp 490-495) reported by the team of Dartiu Xavier Da Silveira in the Addiction Unit at the Federal University of Sao Paulo in Brazil.

Perhaps most intriguingly, the researchers found that it is usually only female medical students make the switch from illegal to legal drugs of abuse, whereas male students tend to alternate cannabis and solvents throughout college years, the researchers report.

“Interventions aiming to influence patterns of drug consumption among medical students must consider both gender differences and evolving patterns of substance use throughout a medical course,” the researchers conclude. In an earlier study (Addict Behav, 2007, 32(8), pp 1740-1744), they reported that “Living with parents or a companion appeared as a protective factor for the use of cannabis”. But, they also found that being male and taking part in sporting activities was often associated with both cannabis and solvent abuse.

In related research (Addict Behav, 2008, 33(3), pp 397-411), researchers at the Center for Substance Abuse Research at the University of Maryland College Park, investigated the prevalence of cannabis use disorders among more than 1200 first-year college students, aged 17 to 20. They found that a significant proportion of cannabis-using college students could be diagnosed as suffering from some kind of cannabis-related disorder. However, they add that even if there is no obvious disorder, many of the users are at serious risk of problems, including physical injuries, and commonly miss class.

In the light of such statistics, you really have to question those pleas of “I never inhaled, m’lud”, especially if it’s your doctor making them, and puts a different light on those “green” prescriptions GPs hand out advising us to live a healthier lifestyle, eat better, and get more exercise.

Who Do You Work For?

Wages

Getting the balance right between work and life is difficult, if not impossible, for many people. There are so many pressures on us pushing and pulling from countless directions. Multitasking has become the norm, but the act of juggling career, family, and social life and keeping all aspects circling through the air, never dropping anything, remains an unattainable goal. Perhaps it always was.

Maybe the few who succeed are happy 24/7, get plenty of sleep, have quality time with family and friends, and enjoy and are satisfied fully by their work and then there are the rest of us back here on planet earth with bills to pay, mouths to feed, and things to see and do.

Caroline Gatrell of the Management Learning and Leadership department and Cary Cooper in the Management School at Lancaster University, UK, point out in a recent research paper how work-life balance policies are important in controlling employee stress levels. They discuss the details of a study on work-life balance in the current issue of European Journal of International Management (2008, 2(1), 71-86).

They have investigated just how gender and body affect the way companies handle these policies. Their research shows that, despite advances in equality rules and regulations, there is a serious gap between the social expectations of professionally employed mothers and fathers. Men, they say are generally discouraged from working flexibly, while mothers who work long hours are repeatedly criticised.

Gatrell and Cooper argue that the pressure to organise work-life balance, according to embodied and gendered social norms, is a cause of stress to both fathers and mothers, this is no truer than among those employed at a managerial level. They concede that there is no standard family, never was, so that the problems of work-life balance may differ, depending on the social situation of the group under consideration.

They point out that the stresses and pressures may be very different for lone parents, same-sex relationships, and for workers with no children. Regardless, the lives of married and co-habiting men and women with children remain the focus of social policies on work-life balance, at least in those countries within the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), which includes the Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, UK, US, etc.

They ask, “Why does work-life balance matter to policy makers, and why might it matter to employers?” and explain how the concept of ‘work-life balance’ was originally developed as a result of government policies ‘aimed specifically at addressing the pressures attendant in combining work with family life’, particularly where both parents are in work. These work-life balance policies are usually associated with giving employees opportunities to work flexibly and were initially aimed at working mothers.

Flexibility might be interpreted in different ways by different people, bosses, or employees. “These could include the rearrangement of working times to suit individual needs, job-shares, or the undertaking at home of tasks which would previously have been associated with day-time, bodily presence, in the office,” the researchers explain.

However, “In practice, most employers interpret ‘flexibility’ in terms of giving some employees the opportunity to reduce working hours by working part time or fractionally.” This has ultimately led to a very narrow range of opportunities. “Perhaps employers’ narrow interpretation of flexibility is due, in part, to the possibility that the whole idea of work-life balance poses a problem for employers,” the researchers suggest. It is most likely that in a market-driven economy, employers will want to maximize profits and reduce costs. Inevitably, this would mean re-shaping ‘worker friendly’ polices to their advantage, which could quite possibly be at the expense of those staff for whom the policies were originally intended to help.

“The experiences of employed fathers and mothers is at odds with research which shows that men and women in professional and managerial roles seek to spend more time with families, especially when children are young, and find it stressful if this is hard to achieve. The link between long-hours-cultures, stress and unhealthy behaviour such as poor diet and increased alcohol consumption has been proven conclusively,” argue Gatrell and Cooper. Like I say, who do you work for?

Gatrell, C., & Cooper, C. (2008). Work-life balance: working for whom? European J. of International Management, 2 (1) DOI: 10.1504/EJIM.2008.016929

Six Degees of Separation

In the latter part of my university career I met someone from another part of the country who had taken an entirely different degree course at roughly the same time as me, but whom I’d never bumped into at university itself. In fact, it wasn’t until we both ended up working in a small town in the USA by sheer coincidence that we mat in the first place. What was odd though was that we seemed to know a lot of the same people. And, if we didn’t know the same people we knew people who knew them and so on.

At the time, neither of us had heard of the six degrees of Kevin Bacon, or the whole concept of degrees of separation, idea. In fact this was 20 years ago and I don’t think that game had even been invented. We thought we’d stumbled on a new theory and began extrapolating wildly about how with just a few connections everyone in the world might be interconnected. This was at a time before even web 1.0 too, let alone web 2.0, so the whole idea of extensive online networking was yet to be born.

Anyway, we still keep in touch and are occasionally dumbfounded by the apparently supernatural connections that seem to crop up on a regular basis. For instance, my friend was chatting in a pub with a group of friends and some “new” people in the social circle a few years back. Conversation turned to travel, my friend mentioned her job in the USA, and one of the new people in the circle mentioned knowing someone who had done the same job, at roughly the same time. The new person my friend later related was my wife’s sister and those two are now best friends. A similar coincidence occurred to my own sister who met someone “new” to her social circle (again, in a pub, is there a theme here, do you think?) who turned out to know both me and my friend from some other place. I could go on…

Anyway, as many people will know this idea of everyone in the world being connected within so many friends, relatives, and acquaintances was already well known even 20 years ago and well before Kevin Bacon started acting. Seemingly, it was Guglielmo Marconi, developer of radio communication, who in his 1909 Nobel speech is thought to be the first person to suggest the magic number 6 (actually 5.83) as being somehow pertinent in connecting everyone together, although he was referring to a network of radio stations to provide global coverage.

In Stanley Milgram’s so-called “small world experiment”, he attempted to measure the connectivity of Americans to determine whether there was a separation factor. Although he never referred to the “six degrees of separation”, Milgram did discover that only a small number of connections is needed to interlink the entire population. It turns out that, as with a network, such as the World Wide Web, there are several large hubs, people or portals with a huge number of connections on which the connectivity of all those billions of websites and people hang.

It’s quite unlikely that without the advent of electronic communication, we would find the connectivity between all 6,647,380,082 people to be such a small number. I was musing on this subject while adding a new friend to my LinkedIn and Facebook accounts. I have not been very active on LinkedIn and have just 31 connections on that online networking site. However, those 31 contacts have a total of 2700+ connections of their own, and if I move along the degrees of separation another notch, there would be 171,000+ contacts of contacts’ contacts. Just four degrees of separation would bring me into contact with almost 20 million people, five degrees would be almost 2 billion.

Within 6 degrees of separation I could connect with 200 billion people, which is obviously going to require at least one new address book. If you’ve got more LinkedIn contacts than my small cluster, just think how many people you could connect to…oh…wait a minute…

There is, however, a theory, well supported by anthropology, that our brains were wired by evolution to cope with a mere 150 close contacts. That’s 150 people you’d know and “love”. The theory may explain why hunter-gatherer villages topped out at around that population size, why certain groups, such as the Hutterites, split their communities once they reach this size, and have done for centuries, and maybe even why fighting groups work best at fewer than 200 members. You simply haven’t got the brain power to really care about more than that number of people, because you wouldn’t be able to keep track of all the relationships between the group members if there were more.

Maybe it’s time to trim down those friends lists if you’ve got several thousand twitter contacts. You can only really call close a limited number of people, according to this theory. That said, humans are still evolving, maybe there will be some reproductive advantage to having thousands of virtual friends should environmental pressures change in coming years. By the way, I’m yet to find a personal connection with Kevin Bacon.

Brain Scan Reveals Cultural Differences

Magnetic resonance imaging

I’ve just finished writing a news article for the SpectroscopyNOW.com MRI ezine and wanted to expand on some of the implications of the work here. The item describes the results of recent research that purportedly show differences in how born-and-bred Americans differed from immigrant East Asians tackling a simple visual test based on displayed sequences of boxes and lines.

The functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study looked at differences in activity between 10 Americans and 10 East Asians while they carried out that task. Apparently, they found significant differences depending on whether or not the volunteers were working out the solution to the task based on individual lines or the lines in the context of others. The volunteers were also asked to complete a questionnaire about their cultural attitudes. The research doesn’t intend to imply that either group did better or worse than the other, this is simply about different regions of the brain lighting up during the task and whether that might be correlated with differences in cultural heritage.

It’s interesting work and the researchers claim to have shown for the first time that a person’s cultural upbringing and the extent to which one identifies with those cultural influences can affect brain activity patterns when faced with a specific task.

In the current study, however, the researchers seem to make the rather sweeping generalisation that American culture values the individual and so emphasizes the independence of objects from their context, while East Asian culture tends to emphasize the collective and the interdependence of objects based on context. This, they say, explains why they see such a big difference in brain activity between the two groups of volunteers, the Americans focusing on the individual aspects of the task and the East Asians seeing the collectiveness of the boxes and sticks in the sequence.

My first thought while writing the news item, was whether or not their initial assumptions about cultural stereotypes remains valid in an increasingly globalised world. Do Americans focus on the individual and do East Asians think more in terms of society as a whole? More to the point the study was carried out with just ten individuals from each culture. Yes, those two groups may have different attitudes and aptitudes, but are those results statistically significant?

How random was the choice of the ten East Asians. Apparently, they were people coming to the USA to live! Does that make them “typical” of their fellow countrymen? I would suggest not at all. People who leave their home country are often very different from their stay-at-home counterparts in attitude and outlook . Perhaps these ten individuals had a very different cultural attitude to their former countrymen. Indeed, what if by virtue of their wishing to emigrate to the USA had coloured their whole outlook and notions of their own culture. Maybe they carried out the task in a way they hoped would be more American, or conversely, maybe they tried to be more East Asian to help the researchers. Similarly, who’s to say anyone taking part in such experiments behaves as they normally would given that they’re stuck in a noisy MRI machine being put under pressure to perform.

fMRI is a powerful tool. The burgeoning list of results it generates grows day by day and I will continue to report them for the ezine assuming they are worthy of reporting. The present results are intriguing, but I do feel that they are stretching the perceived prowess of fMRI a little too far. To my mind, there is an enormous gulf between demonstrating some difference in brain activity while a a few individuals carry out an esoteric task and correlating that with alleged cultural differences, especially given the circumstances of those who are supposed to have essentially polarised outlooks.

PaperID – An Open Source Identifier for Research Papers

As a journalist, I receive a lot of press releases that cite “forthcoming” papers. Depending on the publisher one can usually find the paper in a pre-press state on their website. However, it’s often the case that the DOI does not go live at the same time as the embargo expires on the press release, and so I might legitimately publish an article about the research I cannot use the DOI as the reference and must use the direct URL for the paper. Unfortunately, some publishers then move the paper when the paper publishes, so the link I used ends up broken.

Moreover, this cannot be useful for authors themselves in that a paper that does not make the grade at the International Journal of Good Stuff and ends up being resubmitted to the Parochial Bulletin of Not So Good Stuff will gain a different identification code along the way.

Will Griffiths on ChemSpider was recently discussing the possibility of an OpenURL system. I think we could go one step further.

A simple standardized way of generating a unique identifier for each and every paper that would be transportable between different phases of the publication process from submission to acceptance and publication, or rejection and resubmission elsewhere, would be a much better way of registering papers. The identifier would be created at the point when the final draft is ready to be mailed to the first editorial office in the chain, perhaps based on timestamp, lead author initials, and standard institution abbreviation. It could be the scientific literary equivalent of an InChIkey for each research paper.

There would have to be a standardized validation system, so that authors were sure to be using the right system, but that could be established relatively painlessly through the big institutions, be networked and have cross-checking to avoid duplicates. And, of course, be open source, open access.

The possibilities are endless, PaperID would create an electronic paper trail from author through preprint, in press, to online, and final publication. It might even be back-extended into the area of Open Notebook Science and equally usefully into archival, review, and cross-referencing.

DOI is useful most of the time OpenURL sounds intriguing, but PaperID could be revolutionary.

No Spies Under My Bed

Computer spy

Currently, the only truly effective way consumers can stop the collection of their personal data when shopping is not to use the internet, to be paid and to pay for everything in cash, and to hide their money in their mattress.

More seriously, most of us will continue to use web services despite privacy concerns. You can try to opt-out of marketing schemes or reconfigure your web browser to reject advances from sites that offer cookies or install spying applications. However, most such rejections will prevent you from trading on most e-commerce sites altogether. So, cookies will crumble, there’s no two ways about it if you want to shop online or use web 2.0 interactive sites. You can, of course, use software to delete those cookies as soon as you’re finished your interaction with the site and so gain a little privacy and prevent the sites tracking where you went after you left when you visit a second time. But, either way, they’re going to get lots of useful information while the cookie lasts.

There is no single solution to preventing the increasing erosion of personal privacy on the Web, says Madan Lal Bhasin of the Business School SungKyunKwan University in Seoul, South Korea. Writing in the latest issue of the International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising (2008, vol 4, pp 213-240) he describes how new e-commerce technology has increased the ability of online retailers and others to collect, monitor, target and sell personal information about their customers to third parties.

Countless companies across the globe are doing just that in ways that were not dreamed of before the advent of the Web. Moreover, the emergence of so-called social media web 2.0 sites, such as MySpace and Facebook has led to a new generation of privacy issues that go beyond those seen with conventional e-commerce websites.

As such, online consumer and web user privacy is becoming an ever keener focal point among cyber activists as well as among governments and regulators. That said, when it is the governments themselves losing and abusing the personal data of millions of taxpayers (see recent UK news), then the notion of any government protecting one’s privacy becomes absurd. Nevertheless, in the long-term, finding a balance between absolute personal privacy and the smooth operation of commerce and social sites in cyberspace poses a significant challenge.

Bhasin and colleagues point out that are grave dangers for corporations that collect and use personal information, ignoring privacy legislative and regulatory warning signs. Indeed, such abuse could prove to be very costly not only in terms of putative fines from regulators but also through loss of business among customers increasingly aware of their privacy rights. In the worst-case scenario it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a company abusing standard privacy etiquette to the extreme could collapse should word spread and users boycott the site or mount retaliatory attacks of their own against the company’s web servers. Regardless, many companies can and do repeatedly flout the complex rules and regulations that govern privacy in the US, Europe, and elsewhere.

Technology that protects consumer privacy must work without stifling e-commerce. It must somehow be foolproof and be entirely transparent to end-users. Unfortunately, no such technology yet achieves this. There are countless personal software products, such as anti-spyware programs, cookie cutters, anonymous proxies, and other solutions, such as Firefox plugins like NoScript (which blocks all scripting on a website) and AdBlockPlus (which blocks advertisements). These can reduce the chances of private data being sucked from an individual’s web browsing habits.

However, there are hundreds of such programs each with a slightly different purpose. The field is heavily fragmented and many users are not only unaware of these programs they are also generally unaware of the existence of spyware and cookies. An additional problem arises when novice users having heard rumour of spyware, download tools without taking advice. There are well-known legitimate tools available. There are many instances of malware surrogates of those tools that often rank higher in the search engine results pages and so are more prominent. Installation of such rogue programs can result in deeper privacy compromises than the user hoped to avert.

Similarly, software that encrypts, deletes history files or shields your computer from apparently benevolent, but potentially malicious, applications is available but many users are again unaware of the issues intrinsic to using cyberspace and so do not use such programs. Rogue versions of every kind of protective software exist to exploit the novice user.

Legitimate e-commerce and web 2.0 sites have transparent privacy policies. These sites and others may also use online seals of trustworthiness and browser certificates that demonstrate credibility. However, such statements and badges are only useful if the companies that display them adhere to the underlying principles. Any company could wear a badge of honour, and yet even large, well-known companies do not necessarily comply fully with their own privacy policies and they allow trust certificates to expire. something many users simply ignore without realising the implications.

“Unfortunately, there is no ‘single’ solution to stop the erosion of privacy in cyberspace – no single law that can be proposed or single technology that can be invented to stop the profilers and spies in their tracks,” Bhasin re-asserts. He concludes that, “The battle of privacy, of course, must be fought on three fronts – legal, political and technological – and each new assault must be vigilantly resisted as it occurs.” Whether or not individuals will ever have the weaponry to win the battle is a different matter, we can try, but I suspect the only truly private approach is that bundle of cash stuffed in your mattress.

Most Commented Posts on Sciencebase

If you have ever wondered what gets people chatting on the Sciencebase Blog and why the site has now almost reached the 5000 passed the 3000 newsfeed subscriber point, then you might like to check out this selection of recent posts that, according to a neat little WordPress plugin are the posts with the most comments. Actually Alex King’s Popularity Contest can do the same thing.

It makes for interesting reading, not least because it reveals just how diverse the posts are that catch your interest. You can see a selection of the top-commented posts compiled in January 2008 below.

Some posts obviously pique the curiosity of school students working on science assignments, others reach out to those interested in new avenues of research in medicine, and yet others touch the raw nerves often exposed in the evolution-creation debate. Some, like the Lego and the mp3 player items simply entertain and provide a little education at the same time.

I may make this a regular feature, so watch out for an update soon and
don’t forget to click the titles that catch your eye most and leave your own comments to help keep the debate rolling along.

Spammatical Errors

I usually ignore the comment spam folders on this website as per my own advice. Occasionally, however, I will scan them quickly. I do so if a regular reader has commented and has emailed to say that their comment is yet to appear. Legitimate words do sometimes get caught in the Akismet netting. I can then add the individual to the filter whitelist and approve the comment.

Spam comments usually come in one of a few limited types. The first is the straightforward nonsense list of random lewd keywords, Rx ingredients, and messages pertaining to the impossible enhancement of various organs, and it is not to Messrs Hammnond nor Henry Willis and his Sons to which I am referring here. The second type is the bizarre one-word message saying: “Cool!”, “Nice,” “Sorry,” and “Interesting”. When you first see this kind of message, they may give a blogger a little ego boost (about 0.000003154%). But, after the 10,376th you begin to doubt their sincerity, especially as they are usually accompanied by links to lewd keywords, Rx ingredients and the enhancement of various…you know the rest.

Anyway, there is another kind of comment spam and that is the kind that resembles a genuine comment but then lets itself down with a stupid link to a dumb site. It’s usually a brief sentence or phrase. Sometimes it will be an entirely random string of words, presumably scraped from an online text, but occasionally it will seem to actually be attempting to engage in a conversation via a blog’s comments.

You might see phrases like: “Hi Guys! What Your Site Powered By?” and a link to some expensive software, “My brother Tom’s been working real hard all year, but he’s struggling to make ends meet. How do you think he could improve his credit rating?” and a link to a credit card site, or perhaps “Let’s keep in touch we can help each other with sites,” and a link to some unknown web hosting company. Even bizarre queries such as “What effects did katrina on mississippi?” with an insurance link appear every now and then.

Of course, at this stage in blogging history, most bloggers recognise these messages as detrimental to their sites as, once again, they will have the enhancing, Rx and lewd keyword links built in. But, it’s the unusual style in which some are written that intrigues me. I don’t think it says anything much about the psychology of spammers, especially those that are nothing but spewing bots, nor about anything deep taking place in English lessons. They are intriguing in how sophisticated might be the phrasing let down by a slip of syntax or grammatical integrity.

For instance, a recent commenter was able to construct the following quite complex sentence: “Your website is beautifully decorated and easily navigated.” and yet they blew it with their second line: “I have enjoyed visiting the site today and visit again,” which unfortunately doesn’t parse. Similarly, “Some nice article here. thanks for it.” Not only starts a “sentence” with a lower case “t” but there is a serious mismatch between the quantities discussed.

Admittedly, some of the less exact grammar comes from spam originating in parts of the world where the native tongue may not be English. Personally, I would be useless at spamming in Portuguese, Mandarin, Hindi, or any of a few dozen other languages. I could probably scrape through with a spam in French, German, Italian, or Spanish, although I’d have to have an international lewd word dictionary to hand to do so.

In the following comment spam, there is almost subtle use of the word “seldom”, but it lies in stark contrast to the quality of grammar in the rest of the phrase: “This is really fresh idea of the design of the site! I seldom met such in Internet. Good Work dude!”

An easy target is this comment, which appears repeatedly: “I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links”. Yes, if that one had escaped Akismet and I’d approved it I can just imagine readers dashing off to look for those links, which, you guessed it, pointed to some great insurance deals on organ enhancement drugs.