That, I must say, is one of the arguments that turns me off to it. I really could not possibly care less how long it takes any system other than my laptop to boot. My laptop does run a distro with systemd, and I do like that it boots fast....I would not hesistate for a second to give that speed up if I needed to for something I do once a day usually and twice a day at most.

The majority of systems I deal with are servers. They mostly have plenty of CPU and memory available and typically run very few services..... they boot plenty fast without systemd.

Really the most annoying thing about it for me isn't going to be learning it, its going to be training other people to deal with it and supporting them when they find the software they are installing isn't setup for it properly and they need to troubleshoot and fix it.

If there was some real benefit, I am all for it but....boot speed? Talk about not worth it if that is the "benefit"

Except not everyone reading this knows that and the very fact that there is difficulty in detection calls some question on the "1 case in 14 years" claim; since we should expect false negatives due to the pharmacology of one of the drugs in question.

It is quite understandable to day that many tests for GHB would be false positives or false negatives so its not worth doing, but, that means the case is inconclusive, and saying "1 case in 14 years" means all inconclusive cases are bing lumped with all the true negatives which, is misleading at best.

I would, be shocked if the numbers were high given how rare this sort of crime really is compared to more mundane versions of the same; however, I have trouble believing it is quite this cut and dry simple.

> Why nail-polish? Why not just use the strips?

Easy, it reduces the steps required between returning to your drink or realizing you have forgotten to watch it, and doing the test. It removes....barriers. If you have to go into your pocket or purse to remove test strips, you are less likely to want to do it as often as you should....it could also be seen as insulting to whoever you are with that you don't trust them.

> doesn't anyone see a problem with sticking your fingers in your drink?

Not to me, but I understand that there are people grossed out by such things however, your body evolved to process far worst than whatever your fingers are likely to harbor, even after a night out drinking and touching doorknobs.

well wouldn't you expect GHB to be hard to detect since it occurs naturally anyway in the body and the body is excellent at eliminating it? I have taken it myself, it onsets in 10 minutes if the dose is large enough, and is pretty much back to baseline within an hour, its doubtful anyone in real disress makes it there fast enough to be reliably tested.

That said, I have little doubt you are mostly correct that its very few. Having personally gotten myself to debilitated states on both GHB and Alcohol, I would be hard pressed to really differentiate the effects (aside from GHBs lack of a hangover but, if you are doing both anyway....) from such a state.

I suspect the majority of such cases are really people who got drunker than they realized, and may have trouble believing that they drank that much.

Which brings up a very legitimate question: Do these nail polishes give a false sense of security when out drinking? Or, on the other hand, will simply having a "string on ones finger" itself help to remind the wearer to be more careful by inducing her to take conscious steps towards recognizing danger?

I suspect the former but.... I can't really say that the second is implausible either. Regardless, I am doubtful that their main effect of detecting these substances will, in and of itself, be of much use.

> Or are there enough people out there who have been exposed within three days and are as of yet symptom free?

Well that number seems to be increasing every day. So that is a positive um right?

Actually I think the way you do it is with a double blind in a population that is already likely to be exposed, or likely to be exposed soon.... then watch for whether the people vaccinated with the real deal vs the placbo get infected at higher rates.

Since you don't even know if it works, its not like you are actually withholding treatement on those with the placebo, and its a population you expect to have some cases anyway. So if it works, it could protect some of the population and allow for others.... if it doesn't work, any new risks they are exposed to are only from the drug itself, as long as you can weigh that against the risk and outcomes of ebola infection.....

Essentially I think the only viable population is medical professionals themselves who work with Ebola patients, and family of patients who just recently brought their family member to the clinic. That is mostly because any cases that are found have to be isolates asap and so there is no possibility for any real control group outside the clinics/centers.

> Rushing a red light is bad, but it is not always more dangerous than exceeding the speed limit.

This is true, but what is really most annoying about this whole issue is.... there is already, and has been for MANY YEARS a better solution, and its very simple.

All you need to do to virtually eliminate the kinds of accidents that happen from light running is.... to delay the green slightly. Put in a 2 second delay between one road getting the red and the other getting the green. Done. Do people still rush lights? Yes they do....but.... a lot less collisions.

Once again showing where tightening regulations and enforcing them even more strictly is not always the best solution in fact, its a bone headed one.

Well, I agree there is probably little of value there, however, I think you are missing what documents of value they do have. Specifically, information about their inspection program and any investigations they may be doing. That is data that, at least theoretically, has value to the subjects of any investigation or inspection.

Whether it is of real value or whether they would actually pay for it (or hire someone to get it) is another question entirely. I would have no problem believing that a few times a year someone breaks into their systems hoping to find something like that which they could turn around and sell... I am more doubtful that its a very profitable endeavor.

No the fallacy is yours in assume I made a claim I didn't. Yes it would be fallacy to claim that because it happens here it must happen everywhere but, there is ample evidence this sort of corruption has happened everywhere humans have had the chance to be corrupt. My own evidence of it going on is only one small confirmation in a several thousand year long history of people using whatever power they are given to their own advantage.

This. I live in MA, and its no different here. Hell, they caught one of our state reps on camera actually stuffing an envelope of cash in her bra. A business my wife used to work at owned the building they were in, right in south boston. They applied for a permit to get a roof deck; and were asked straight out for a bribe to make it happen, when they refused.... so was their permit. This shit goes on everywhere.

You know, if it were a house boat that might make more sense, a friend of mine bought one we liked to refer to as "A one bedroom apartment with a top speed of 20 MPH"

Though, would need to be at least 2 apartments to condo it out.

Well I hate to play devil's advocate for the law but, there is a major difference between duhvelopers and muggers.

Muggers tend to work alone or with an accomplice with little whereas Duhvelopers are actually organized groups with policies, rules, and procedures. Muggers don't sit down before they go out for the evening and come up with a business plan; they don't tend to get anyone to insure their project either.

You don't even need to make duhvelopers care. You need to make insurance companies care, then they will make the duhvelopers care by refusing to insure projects.

No that is what nearly all of them do, the only difference is really a disagreement over which is the penstupimate politician.

Oh its terrible. If the sound is on so I can hear the story, its generally a good laugh. If the sound is off (like at the coffee shop I stop at on my way to work most days) then its maybe 2 out of 3 stories where I can even tell what they are talking about from CC text alone. It must be infuriating to try and watch the news for an actual deaf person.

> You basically get stopped and if you calm down they let you go.

I wasn't aware that testing people for the ability to calm down was so important. Guess fuck anyone with an anxiety disorder. Only a couple of them anyway, and as long as they can be quiet about it no harm no foul right? So what if they experience a little personal hell for ....

> The I important thing to remember is 99% of the time it's going to be a false positive

99% is one time in a 100 is not a false positive? I have trouble believing even that is anything but a gross underestimate. Maybe 99.9999% or more. Since each crowd contains only a whole number of terrorists, the average crowd contains exactly 0 of them, so every single detained person is a false positive.... making it really 100%.

Maybe it will someday luck out and catch a terrorist, but it wont be before the number of people detained has been lost count of.

spot on. I mean sure, there must be some "market" as in someone at some point has wanted to buy some material and someone at some point wanted to sell some. Personally I suspect the market is a lot more a few people who "have some radioactive material and see dollar signs in their eyes" and thus might seek out a scientist to check it out than any sort of real market.

Just because someone has something he thinks he can sell to someone doesn't mean he has or ever will have a buyer.