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

Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

antipolygraph.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 196 posts

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#131

Post by kitteh »

jacquesm wrote: post #107
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It actually makes sense for law enforcement even knowing the device does nothing because it can be used to give them probable cause to search somewhere they wouldn't otherwise legally be able to search. When the shit hits the fan the company that sold it takes the fall, which is part of what the police were paying for. Perhaps a similar logic is at work for the military, but one would think they'd be more concerned w…

Just like those dogs that indicate the presence of drugs. Except of course when there aren't any. I've had my car searched a couple of times at the Canadian/American border because a dog gave a signal. Given the number of times I've crossed that border the false positive rate must be ridiculously high. Since you don't have much in terms of rights when crossing a border I wondered why they even bother with the pretext…

US LEOs are big on traffic stops + delay tactics to buy time to have the drug dog arrive and sniff a car. Back when the show "Live PD" was on it was used heavily and officer calling a "hit" on the dog in some areas sometimes seemed like a stretch.

Coworker of mine was a sheriff deputy in Indiana and he confirmed this was a common practice.

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#132

Post by boomboomsubban »

Imnimo wrote: post #111
jacquesm wrote: post #84

The polygraph is pseudoscience. Of course it can be beaten, it doesn't work to begin with. Why the US still puts so much weight on them when they know they don't work is a mystery to me. Just get rid of the damn things and do your homework better.

I think its a way to get people to admit to things. Like even knowing they don't work, it's stressful to be strapped into that chair, and even knowing the technician is probably lying when they say they're detecting deception on a particular question, it's stressful when they accuse you of lying. I bet a lot of people crack and admit to things they were hoping to hide. The trouble comes from the fact that in order fo…

> I bet a lot of people crack and admit to things they were hoping to hide.

I bet a lot of people also crack and admit to things they never did. You're essentially using the stress associated with the "magic" of the polygraph to coerce a confession.

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#133

Post by ganoushoreilly »

blaser-waffle wrote: post #79
roenxi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how stupid a spy would have to be for "are you a spy? Be honest!" questions to work. But if I were running an organisation I suppose I'd have people ask anyway because it'll catch some idiot sooner or later. Polygraphs as a power play - well, I'm sure it happens but that probably isn't the reason it is in the room. Maybe the polygraph is a ruse to make people think FBI questioners are stupider than they…

> I'm not sure how stupid a spy would have to be for "are you a spy? Be honest!" questions to work. But if I were running an organisation I suppose I'd have people ask anyway because it'll catch some idiot sooner or later. Those are questions on the SF-86. Ditto for a lot of customs & immigration paperwork. "Idiot detector" questions. But if you don't have them on there then they can claim "but you never asked".

Yep, it's also another line item when charges are brought. Kind of similar to how states like Tennessee that don't have legalized marijuana still have a tax stamp process. I doubt anyone ever applied for one, but if you get caught with some pot, boom pot and failure to present tax stamp. Two for one.

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#134

Post by Loughla »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #132
Imnimo wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its a way to get people to admit to things. Like even knowing they don't work, it's stressful to be strapped into that chair, and even knowing the technician is probably lying when they say they're detecting deception on a particular question, it's stressful when they accuse you of lying. I bet a lot of people crack and admit to things they were hoping to hide. The trouble comes from the fact that in order fo…

> I bet a lot of people crack and admit to things they were hoping to hide. I bet a lot of people also crack and admit to things they never did. You're essentially using the stress associated with the "magic" of the polygraph to coerce a confession.

I've told this story in more depth in other places on this site - The one time in my life I have ever been accused of a crime was when the greenhouse I was working at was robbed. I went to the side of the greenhouse to fix a hole, and while I was gone, a lovely gentlemen decided to empty the cash register.

Flash forward to three police statements and one polygraph later.

My experience with polygraph tests is they are a way for police to coerce a confession. I "failed" the polygraph test, and "should come clean now so they would go easy on me." The problem is, I didn't do it, I didn't know who did it, and I didn't want to know who did it. I was 17, and they had no leads. Just an absolute joke.

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#135

Post by jdc »

Loughla wrote: post #134
boomboomsubban wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I bet a lot of people crack and admit to things they were hoping to hide. I bet a lot of people also crack and admit to things they never did. You're essentially using the stress associated with the "magic" of the polygraph to coerce a confession.

I've told this story in more depth in other places on this site - The one time in my life I have ever been accused of a crime was when the greenhouse I was working at was robbed. I went to the side of the greenhouse to fix a hole, and while I was gone, a lovely gentlemen decided to empty the cash register. Flash forward to three police statements and one polygraph later. My experience with polygraph tests is they are…

Sounds like they hit you with the Reid technique.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_technique

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#137

Post by gameswithgo »

Imnimo wrote: post #111
jacquesm wrote: post #84

The polygraph is pseudoscience. Of course it can be beaten, it doesn't work to begin with. Why the US still puts so much weight on them when they know they don't work is a mystery to me. Just get rid of the damn things and do your homework better.

I think its a way to get people to admit to things. Like even knowing they don't work, it's stressful to be strapped into that chair, and even knowing the technician is probably lying when they say they're detecting deception on a particular question, it's stressful when they accuse you of lying. I bet a lot of people crack and admit to things they were hoping to hide. The trouble comes from the fact that in order fo…

>I think its a way to get people to admit to things

This is the standard way human discourse happens when talking about something for which there is no evidence of efficacy. You back up and try to rationalize some other reason for it's use, even when it makes no sense. Like in this case, using it to get people to admit things, can lead to false confessions or false convictions, especially when some of the people you threaten to use it on know it doesn't work! Do you think the agent who knows it doesn't work, and just uses it as a threat, is going to drop the case when you take the polygraph and fail? Nope!

It remind me very much of when people discuss some supplement that doesn't have evidence: "Oh well those studies didn't use enough/too much/wrong schedule" or acupuncture : "oh well even if it doesn't work the placebo effect is valuable"

you just can't get through to people

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#138

Post by petre »

pmachinery wrote: post #112
petre wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true, however that didn't matter much in the USSR. What mattered is that somebody got punished, paperwork was taken care of and the agents were doing their jobs . All of this is nicely illustrated in the Citizen X movie, although in a different context.

Citizen X is an American drama. If it depicts what you're saying (I've seen it but can't remember it) then it's just another Western dramatization depicting post-Stalin Soviet Union in cliches from the 1930s. In the real life case Citizen X is inspired by[0], nobody was tortured for a conviction, even the guilty man, who was simply put into a cell with a police informer to gather information and questioned normally b…

Post-Stalin Soviet Union clichés, of course. How do you think the wrongly arrested people confessed to the murders in the first place?

"At his trial, Kravchenko retracted his confession and maintained his innocence, stating his confession had been obtained under extreme duress."

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#139

Post by RspecMAuthortah »

jacquesm wrote: post #84

The polygraph is pseudoscience. Of course it can be beaten, it doesn't work to begin with. Why the US still puts so much weight on them when they know they don't work is a mystery to me. Just get rid of the damn things and do your homework better.

> Why the US still puts so much weight on them when they know they don't work is a mystery to me.

Because for a lot this lets you continue whatever spectre of activism they are pursuing. Remember the Justice Kavannaugh sage and his accusers taking polygraph tests?

Re: Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

#140

Post by [deleted] »

mc32 wrote: post #56

Why doesn’t the CIA just come out and tell all their recruits, we trust you and most of you truly believe in the mission and will never compromise but there are always a group of turncoats who will sell secrets or have other affiliations. Due to this we will monitor your credit and you will not know if the persons you are working with are internal investigators and we will have randomized investigations as matter of…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN