Actually, the idea was one of the first things that popped into my mind when someone else (I'm too lazy to find the post, but if you're read "every thread" I'm sure you've seen it) posted the idea of one girl in a group getting this and acting as the designated tester. Of course, then, there's the possibility of someone buying this stuff, dumping it out and refilling the bottle with regular polish to set someone up. The stuff is just bad news and completely unnecessary; there are numerous mitigation tactics that actually work and don't cost a penny.
How does that solve the problem? Honest question, I feel like I might be missing something here, but the way I see it, we have a product that detects two of many existing date rape drugs (albeit the two most popular ones). A scumbag using one of the drugs this doesn't test for won't be foiled by it.
I picked up on that in your response to my post, I was asking what your post was in posting your initial response to Xiaran's post, since you clearly agree with the point he was making (which happens to be the same point I was making, which you've just stated you were supporting). I'm not trying to be argumentative, here, since we clearly are in agreement, I'm just trying to figure out what you issue is with how Xiaran approached the subject to make the very same point.
Moving past that, though, this is a product that detects two of many date rape drugs, providing the opportunity for guaranteed false negatives and a false sense of security for the user of the product. It also opens up a new attack vector, just by its mere existence, but I've been called a woman hater for pointing out the details so I'll leave it to the reader to find my other posts detailing the method. In short, this stuff is bad new, not for potential rapists, but for potential victims; were I a rapist, I'd view this stuff as a gold mine.
Then stop reading them? I'm over it; I've been over it for over a decade, but it's relevant to the topic at hand, so it's being brought up. Get over it, dude.
Such hatred of women, yes, I certainly hate my wife, my friends' wives, my boss' wife, and, well, every other woman I've ever met.
Perhaps I'm just stating an observation. I suppose it also enables men to do the same, but men wearing nail polish is uncommon enough so as to already throw up a red flag, making it much less likely that a man could pull this off. There are a number of mitigation techniques that are actually very effective, but they have to actually be used in order to be useful. This nail polish, however, is not one; sorry if the way I pointed that out offended you, it was not my intent.
The actual number is likely higher, experts say, as incidents of sexual violence are severely underreported in the United States -- particularly among male victims.
Even moreso, this nail polish isn't even really effective in that narrowly-defined scenario. It provides a false sense of security, as it detects only two of many date rape drugs, so a negative result means nothing; and, by its mere existence, opens up a potential plain-sight avenue of attack: woman claims to be wearing this polish (but really is not), woman crushes up a roofie and packs the powder under her nail, woman offers to test friend's drink, drink "tests" negative, but has, in reality, just been drugged. This stuff is just a bad idea, all around.
It's not the false positives most of us are (or, at least, should be) worried about, but the false negatives. This polish tests for GHB and Rohypnol, neither of which you tested positive for; this polish would not have helped you that night. Rather, it would have told you everything was fine, possibly leading you to believe you were simply becoming ill for some other reason. You may never have had the bartender call for an ambulance and never known you had been drugged, all because your nail polish already told you you hadn't.
You're also missing the potential attack vector this polish opens up: a woman with normal mail polish claiming to have this product on her nails crushes up a roofie and packs the powder under her nail before "testing" a drink for a friend.
Trusting someone you know; someone you legitimately know, not just someone you've met a few times, is not irresponsible, unless they've given you a reason not to trust them. I never said that was gender-specific, either. When you're out in public, you've got more than just the people you know and trust to worry about and it *is* irresponsible not to be vigilant in that situation. That you fail to recognize the difference between my scenario, trusting someone I had known or over a year, who had never done me wrong, and doing so in a private setting, versus trusting a crowd of people, most of whom you've probably never met, in a public setting, is your failing, and not mine.
I'm genuinely curious, though; what is the basis on which you are diagnosing me with PTSD and what credentials do you have that provide any validity to that diagnosis? My guess, none and none. If that's the case, you might find yourself afoul of the law (PDF warning; also, that document is specific to my state, but each state has their own, similar laws).
Do these nail polishes give a false sense of security when out drinking?
Given that there are drugs that they don't detect, yes, you bet they do. Their mere existence also opens up a potential avenue for plain-sight attack, as well; a woman wearing normal nail polish can just as easily crush up a roofie, pack the powder under her nail, then "test" her friend's or date's drink for them, drugging the drink right in front of their eyes.
Since it's unlikely that the AC you're replying to will follow up, I'll do so for him. As a man. A man who's been drugged and raped. By a woman. I wasn't robbed, mind you, but that AC is right on three counts (one, I sure, entirely by accident):
1) drug-assisted robbery is more prevalent than drug-assisted rape
2) it happens just as frequently to men
3) which, of course, means that men get drugged, as well
How is it irresponsible to trust my wife and my closest friends? Are you saying I absolutely should behave as though I actually have the PTSD you amateur-diagnosed me with? I wasn't exactly wrong for trusting the girl who drugged me, either; I had known her for over a year, we had been friends for all of that time, and she had never done me wrong up to that point. I was pointing out that I *could have* prevented the incident, had I not trusted her, but that's a far cry from blaming myself for it happening; and I'm still able to trust people, I just do so much more carefully now.
Regarding walking away from drinks, I think it's perfectly fine to leave a drink on my side table when I go take a shit. Like I said, if my wife wanted to drug me, she has much easier ways to do it. Clearly, since I provided qualifying context, I wasn't saying I walk away from drinks at, say, a bar; I also don't nurse them, and keeping my eye on a drink for 5 minutes is a small price to pay for being safe. I've got no problem leaving my drink at a restaurant, though, when my wife is sitting at the table; she'll keep an eye on it just fine -- and like I said, she has easier ways of drugging me if she wants to. And I trust that she doesn't.
If you see something wrong with that, please be specific, otherwise you're making it clear that your only intent here is to troll, which I'm also fine with; I find your kind to be quite entertaining most of the time.
Of course, there's always the "my boyfriend that I didn't tell you about found out about us, so I'm going to tell him you raped me so he doesn't leave me" scenario. This is why you always document consent.
I had a girl try to accuse me of rape when her boyfriend (who I didn't know about) found out she had been with me. She backed down really quickly when I reminded her she was the one who turned the camera on and the video would show that. This method actually does work (though, that isn't why it was recorded; she wanted to make a video and I was cool with that).
And if you're out with a girl who claims to be wearing this nail polish and offers to test your drink, it takes 2 seconds of you watching her actually do it to get your drink drugged. All she has to do is crush the pill up and stick the powder under her nail and you'll be none the wiser when her normal nail polish doesn't detect shit. Enjoy that false sense of security, you won't remember it in the morning.
There's also no way to pack the powder of a crushed up pill under your nail and drug a friend by offering to "test" their drink, either. So, that's good, right? It's also not possible to drug a drink with something this nail polish doesn't detect, thereby creating a false sense of security in your victim, is it? I sure hope not, that would be horrible.
All sarcasm aside, all of that *is* possible. This product now enables a woman *claiming* to be wearing it to covertly drug her friend's or date's drink *right in front of their eyes, while they watch*, and provides a false sense of security, as there already exist a number of drugs it can't detect.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the idea was one of the first things that popped into my mind when someone else (I'm too lazy to find the post, but if you're read "every thread" I'm sure you've seen it) posted the idea of one girl in a group getting this and acting as the designated tester. Of course, then, there's the possibility of someone buying this stuff, dumping it out and refilling the bottle with regular polish to set someone up. The stuff is just bad news and completely unnecessary; there are numerous mitigation tactics that actually work and don't cost a penny.
And the rest of my post?
How does that solve the problem? Honest question, I feel like I might be missing something here, but the way I see it, we have a product that detects two of many existing date rape drugs (albeit the two most popular ones). A scumbag using one of the drugs this doesn't test for won't be foiled by it.
gah.. typos... lots of them... shame on me
The corrections are "what your initial point was", "what your issue is", and "this stuff is bad news", I'm sure you'll find where they belong.
I picked up on that in your response to my post, I was asking what your post was in posting your initial response to Xiaran's post, since you clearly agree with the point he was making (which happens to be the same point I was making, which you've just stated you were supporting). I'm not trying to be argumentative, here, since we clearly are in agreement, I'm just trying to figure out what you issue is with how Xiaran approached the subject to make the very same point.
Moving past that, though, this is a product that detects two of many date rape drugs, providing the opportunity for guaranteed false negatives and a false sense of security for the user of the product. It also opens up a new attack vector, just by its mere existence, but I've been called a woman hater for pointing out the details so I'll leave it to the reader to find my other posts detailing the method. In short, this stuff is bad new, not for potential rapists, but for potential victims; were I a rapist, I'd view this stuff as a gold mine.
Then stop reading them? I'm over it; I've been over it for over a decade, but it's relevant to the topic at hand, so it's being brought up. Get over it, dude.
Such hatred of women, yes, I certainly hate my wife, my friends' wives, my boss' wife, and, well, every other woman I've ever met.
Perhaps I'm just stating an observation. I suppose it also enables men to do the same, but men wearing nail polish is uncommon enough so as to already throw up a red flag, making it much less likely that a man could pull this off. There are a number of mitigation techniques that are actually very effective, but they have to actually be used in order to be useful. This nail polish, however, is not one; sorry if the way I pointed that out offended you, it was not my intent.
Except that the post you were referring to was not mine.
The actual number is likely higher, experts say, as incidents of sexual violence are severely underreported in the United States -- particularly among male victims.
Exactly the point I was making. Thank you.
Even moreso, this nail polish isn't even really effective in that narrowly-defined scenario. It provides a false sense of security, as it detects only two of many date rape drugs, so a negative result means nothing; and, by its mere existence, opens up a potential plain-sight avenue of attack: woman claims to be wearing this polish (but really is not), woman crushes up a roofie and packs the powder under her nail, woman offers to test friend's drink, drink "tests" negative, but has, in reality, just been drugged. This stuff is just a bad idea, all around.
Indeed, 100% of date rapes also involve a rapist.
It's not the false positives most of us are (or, at least, should be) worried about, but the false negatives. This polish tests for GHB and Rohypnol, neither of which you tested positive for; this polish would not have helped you that night. Rather, it would have told you everything was fine, possibly leading you to believe you were simply becoming ill for some other reason. You may never have had the bartender call for an ambulance and never known you had been drugged, all because your nail polish already told you you hadn't.
You're also missing the potential attack vector this polish opens up: a woman with normal mail polish claiming to have this product on her nails crushes up a roofie and packs the powder under her nail before "testing" a drink for a friend.
Trusting someone you know; someone you legitimately know, not just someone you've met a few times, is not irresponsible, unless they've given you a reason not to trust them. I never said that was gender-specific, either. When you're out in public, you've got more than just the people you know and trust to worry about and it *is* irresponsible not to be vigilant in that situation. That you fail to recognize the difference between my scenario, trusting someone I had known or over a year, who had never done me wrong, and doing so in a private setting, versus trusting a crowd of people, most of whom you've probably never met, in a public setting, is your failing, and not mine.
I'm genuinely curious, though; what is the basis on which you are diagnosing me with PTSD and what credentials do you have that provide any validity to that diagnosis? My guess, none and none. If that's the case, you might find yourself afoul of the law (PDF warning; also, that document is specific to my state, but each state has their own, similar laws).
Do these nail polishes give a false sense of security when out drinking?
Given that there are drugs that they don't detect, yes, you bet they do. Their mere existence also opens up a potential avenue for plain-sight attack, as well; a woman wearing normal nail polish can just as easily crush up a roofie, pack the powder under her nail, then "test" her friend's or date's drink for them, drugging the drink right in front of their eyes.
Since it's unlikely that the AC you're replying to will follow up, I'll do so for him. As a man. A man who's been drugged and raped. By a woman. I wasn't robbed, mind you, but that AC is right on three counts (one, I sure, entirely by accident):
1) drug-assisted robbery is more prevalent than drug-assisted rape
2) it happens just as frequently to men
3) which, of course, means that men get drugged, as well
How is it irresponsible to trust my wife and my closest friends? Are you saying I absolutely should behave as though I actually have the PTSD you amateur-diagnosed me with? I wasn't exactly wrong for trusting the girl who drugged me, either; I had known her for over a year, we had been friends for all of that time, and she had never done me wrong up to that point. I was pointing out that I *could have* prevented the incident, had I not trusted her, but that's a far cry from blaming myself for it happening; and I'm still able to trust people, I just do so much more carefully now.
Regarding walking away from drinks, I think it's perfectly fine to leave a drink on my side table when I go take a shit. Like I said, if my wife wanted to drug me, she has much easier ways to do it. Clearly, since I provided qualifying context, I wasn't saying I walk away from drinks at, say, a bar; I also don't nurse them, and keeping my eye on a drink for 5 minutes is a small price to pay for being safe. I've got no problem leaving my drink at a restaurant, though, when my wife is sitting at the table; she'll keep an eye on it just fine -- and like I said, she has easier ways of drugging me if she wants to. And I trust that she doesn't.
If you see something wrong with that, please be specific, otherwise you're making it clear that your only intent here is to troll, which I'm also fine with; I find your kind to be quite entertaining most of the time.
Why defend my position in two separate threads? You're already berating me in another and I'm holding my own quite well.
Of course, there's always the "my boyfriend that I didn't tell you about found out about us, so I'm going to tell him you raped me so he doesn't leave me" scenario. This is why you always document consent.
Not only that, but not all rapists are men, either. Rapists are their own group, but people fail to recognize that.
No, it's like asking a drug addict to document their usage, which many already do.
I had a girl try to accuse me of rape when her boyfriend (who I didn't know about) found out she had been with me. She backed down really quickly when I reminded her she was the one who turned the camera on and the video would show that. This method actually does work (though, that isn't why it was recorded; she wanted to make a video and I was cool with that).
There was no qualifier, there; you added the "all" on your own.
And if you're out with a girl who claims to be wearing this nail polish and offers to test your drink, it takes 2 seconds of you watching her actually do it to get your drink drugged. All she has to do is crush the pill up and stick the powder under her nail and you'll be none the wiser when her normal nail polish doesn't detect shit. Enjoy that false sense of security, you won't remember it in the morning.
There's also no way to pack the powder of a crushed up pill under your nail and drug a friend by offering to "test" their drink, either. So, that's good, right? It's also not possible to drug a drink with something this nail polish doesn't detect, thereby creating a false sense of security in your victim, is it? I sure hope not, that would be horrible.
All sarcasm aside, all of that *is* possible. This product now enables a woman *claiming* to be wearing it to covertly drug her friend's or date's drink *right in front of their eyes, while they watch*, and provides a false sense of security, as there already exist a number of drugs it can't detect.
I'd like to tell you to go fuck yourself, but my employer knows my Slashdot username, so I'll just tell you to have a nice day, instead.