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

Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

antipolygraph.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 183 posts

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#151

Post by Conan_Kudo »

awakeasleep wrote: post #126
delichon wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The polygraph doesn't have to emit any useful data at all to be very useful in interrogations. Like a bomb doesn't have to have any explosive in it to clear a building. Interrogation is a head game and a complicated box with knobs and buttons and maybe even blinking lights makes a fine prop. And there's enough ambiguity in it that it's easy for the operator to believe it helps. Like a dowser with their rods, a clergy…

Everyone repeats this old canard but no one has any evidence even anecdotes to show that a polygraph machine is better than any other way to head fake someone in an interrogation

If people believe it, that's enough. It doesn't have to be good, it just has to mess with people enough.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#152

Post by Der_Einzige »

BlueMacaw wrote: post #86
tokenless wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is a good writer. I also read to end and my attention span isn't good! I think the switching between what happened, what he felt and just the plain "daily WTF" rediculousness of the situations is what kept me locked in.

>He is a good writer. I assumed the author was a she…

You should. Men drop their guards in front of women, especially old women. I expect a lot of active agents in the field look like/are grandmas for this reason.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#153

Post by assaddayinh »

b00ty4breakfast wrote: post #48

I'm always surprised to hear that a government agency administers polygraph tests in something as serious as hiring but then I remember the CIA also spent millions of dollars trying to develop telekinetic assassins and train clairvoyants to spy on the Kremlin.

The main job of every station chief is to sit drunk in bars, listen to the high tales of the locals and yell "i did that" everytime the people had enough into the telephone to washington. Secret services are first and foremost storytellers...

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#154

Post by assaddayinh »

BlueMacaw wrote: post #86
tokenless wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is a good writer. I also read to end and my attention span isn't good! I think the switching between what happened, what he felt and just the plain "daily WTF" rediculousness of the situations is what kept me locked in.

>He is a good writer. I assumed the author was a she…

Every person i inhabitate his or her views in writting becomes a copy of me so she is a he for the time of me reading.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#155

Post by kj4211cash »

This rings so true and I only ever took one polygraph test. I was a nerdy 21 year old and they told me I had failed on the marijuana use question and encouraged me to think about it and come back and retry. I remember being very confused. I withdrew my application and never went back. I wonder how many others gave up on a job opportunity because it was drug abuse Wednesday or whatever.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#156

Post by kj4211cash »

stego-tech wrote: post #7

Adding my POV from a former National Security perspective: Author is 100% on point. The point of a polygraph is three-fold: weeding out the dipshits; exerting power over the powerless; and identifying the valuable assets (typically sociopaths). It does not - cannot - identify liars, deceit, or bad actors on its face (that comes from the manual the author linked). It's not scientific assessment, it's psychological tor…

This is so interesting. I guess I was a dipshit in this scenario? Because I just accepted that the reviewer thought I was lying. Began to question my own memory. And just gave up on the idea of working at that place. In hindsight, I should have protested and not given up. But I was a meek 21 year old and didn't know anything. Seems like a strange filter to apply.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#157

Post by varispeed »

kj4211cash wrote: post #155

This rings so true and I only ever took one polygraph test. I was a nerdy 21 year old and they told me I had failed on the marijuana use question and encouraged me to think about it and come back and retry. I remember being very confused. I withdrew my application and never went back. I wonder how many others gave up on a job opportunity because it was drug abuse Wednesday or whatever.

Isn't the whole point to not lie about anything, so that later on it cannot be used to blackmail you?

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#158

Post by lucketone »

Stevvo wrote: post #49
apical_dendrite wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an old interview on C-SPAN's BookTV with a CIA polygrapher. He seems to genuinely believe in the validity of the polygraph, but watching the interview, I was convinced that the only value comes from intimidation and stress. (all-caps bad transcription) > THE ESSENCE OF A POLYGRAPH TEST IS IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO LOSE BY FAILING A POLYGRAPH TEST IF YOU WILL, OR SOMETHING TO GAIN BY PASSING IT, THAT IS WHAT MA…

It sounds like religion; it only works if people believe in it.

Or like currency.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#159

Post by sigwinch »

jazzpush2 wrote: post #139

I don't get it. The author is 'honest to a fault,' but then lies about discussing the polygraph with others and posts an anonymous op-ed.

When she started the CIA described her personality as naively honest. She concludes that the way they treat honest people makes it an unwise career choice. But, a pathological fantasist might have quite a different experience and no motivation to write an op-ed.

Re: Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

#160

Post by mrgoldenbrown »

gigatree wrote: post #115
rapnie wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wonder when I see one of those hypnosis shows, where someone from the audience makes themselves a docile fool in front of a large crowd, whether they are stooges or it is the real deal. But I wouldn't volunteer to get hypnotised to figure that out, in fear of being the next person who stands imitating a dog in heat on such a stage.

The few people I’ve asked who’ve been hypnotized said it was true and had no reason to lie or trick me, and it seems true. But if the lens is “we already figured out all biology and physics so we can ignore the possibility of actual hypnosis (putting someone in a trance stage) being possible” then it’s hard to see things that there’s actually immense evidence for (eg the telepathy tapes).

The telepathy tapes don't have immense evidence in their favor, unless they've redone everything recently in a controlled way.
Post reply on HN