Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

wikileaks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–99 of 99 posts

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#91

Post by singular »

fusiongyro wrote: post #88
singular wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually don't worry too much about the polygraph, it's complete pseudoscience. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Polygraph

It is complete pseudoscience. In the Penn and Teller's BS episode about it they have a guy who teaches people how to get whatever result they want by controlling their anal sphincter. Apparently it's not complicated. It is, however, still a part of getting or maintaining clearance. A friend of mine wound up changing jobs simply because he failed the polygraph twice and didn't want to bother going in for a third.

Yeah I also read that taking an anti-anxiety medication such as Valium beforehand can have similar results.

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#92

Post by charonn0 »

singular wrote: post #41
rdtsc wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a clearance you should absolutely not be clicking on it (if you are also paranoid and don't want to possibly fail your polygraph test -- "have you accessed or downloaded classified documents on your personal computer...?" er...oops). Otherwise if you don't hold a clearance, I don't think they can do anything to you (however, I am not a lawyer so don't take this as a legal advice etc etc...)

Actually don't worry too much about the polygraph, it's complete pseudoscience. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Polygraph

I've passed several polygraph exams when (if they actually worked) I shouldn't have.

Utter bollocks, them.

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#94

Post by berntb »

skrebbel wrote: post #67
berntb wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Now, why do things have to be this way? Are you certain that, even while we the people are perfectly capable of being nice to each other, the countries that represent us must act like immorally self-centered egoists? That is a very common opinion (yes, I'm calling you naive). You are making an analogy between civil society (where people are nice) to states, where there is "realpolitik". You forget that there is a v…

Then explain the EU to me? Especially the beginnings of it? E.g. France, UK and Germany, mortal enemies for centuries, shifting focus from self-interest defense thinking to collaboration?

If I should suggest a more... thoughtful opinion for an idealist -- how about looking reality in the eye, then trying to organise the world, so it is in the self interest of countries to be nice and tolerant?

Start by looking up "the democratic peace theory".

And note that you can make an analogy between this and how societies went all the way from clan warfare to the welfare state. (if welfare states really are workable is another discussion that (a) also would upset an idealist and (b) I really don't know enough to have an opinion.)

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#95

Post by singular »

reidmain wrote: post #77
tikwidd wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and yet, still used

In most countries polygraph tests are inadmissible in court. They are typically used in criminal investigations as a way to make suspects feel uneasy so investigators can pick up visual tells.

The example here is somebody who apparently needs to take one to access some confidential information - and clearly they take a pass/fail seriously, so it seems some (presumably US?) government agencies do take it seriously enough to make passing one a security requirement.

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#96

Post by sampsonjs »

tokenadult wrote: post #18

I have an American friend (we met when we were both living overseas) who has been all over the world because he works for the international travel industry. He hasn't lived in the United States for at least a decade. If I remember correctly, he hasn't even visited the United States for at least four years. He and I have both long been skeptics about the United States Department of State and especially the Foreign Ser…

I know man, what you gonna do? Someone has to arm thugs like Meles Zenawi and Yoweri Museveni, might as well be us.

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#97

Post by caf »

rdtsc wrote: post #12

Usual disclaimer applies for those with a clearance: by accessing classified documents on your home computers you could get yourself in serious trouble (in theory). In light of this particular situation I don't know if anyone has ever been punished but you should be careful.

This particular set of documents was apparently declassified 6 years ago, it's just that Wikileaks has made them easily searchable.

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#98

Post by reidmain »

singular wrote: post #95
reidmain wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most countries polygraph tests are inadmissible in court. They are typically used in criminal investigations as a way to make suspects feel uneasy so investigators can pick up visual tells.

The example here is somebody who apparently needs to take one to access some confidential information - and clearly they take a pass/fail seriously, so it seems some (presumably US?) government agencies do take it seriously enough to make passing one a security requirement.

Good point. A quick Google search doesn't seem to bring up any laws that prevent employers from using polygraph results in determining whether to hire or fire someone.

Re: Wikileaks release "PlusD": Database of 1.7 million diplomatic cables

#99

Post by Andrew_Quentin »

Cacti wrote: post #64
scotty79 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it still classified if it's public? Doesn't a thing stop being secret automatically when it leaks out? If it does not then I wonder why they even called it "classified" or "secret". They should call it "blargh" and avoid the confusion.

No. Whether something is classified or not has nothing to do with who has read it or whether its common knowledge or leaked or not. Classified is classified until its officially declassified, period.

lol
Post reply on HN