Live data from Hacker News

Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

antipolygraph.org

171–180 of 196 posts

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

#171

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 agree it should never, ever be used in any capacity when it comes to criminal proceedings, but as an employment requirement, I think the 3-letter agencies should keep them, and I suspect they will unless/until they perhaps obtain some literal mind-reading technology.

It's a psychological tactic, and is all about pressure. It serves as a potential deterrent and mind game that works on multiple levels. Consider it like a scarecrow in a field. Yeah, some of the smart crows will figure out it's just some clothes on a pole, but it still deters and confuses the rest. The only silly thing would be calling a scarecrow a security guard or a polygraph a lie detector test. It doesn't mean it's silly to put a scarecrow in your field.

Obviously it's 99.9% pseudoscience, and obviously it's beatable and unreliable, but I don't think that's the point. I'm sure they're very much aware of that, and still use it because they see the value of it as a psychological tactic. It's one of many lines of defense: if you pass that line of defense, it definitely doesn't at all imply you're not a spy, but if you don't pass it (in any way), the security requirements dictate that the safest option is for them to not hire you.

Absolutely no positive value should be attributed to a passing result. The idea is exclusively to attribute negative value to a failing result. And then, not value in terms of some actual empirical finding ("was this person really being deceitful?"), but just value in terms of whether or not to hire them to handle the most sensitive of secrets.

The only abomination is using it as a consequential determination of truth or lie, or innocence or guilt, like in a police investigation or trial. It should never be permitted in such a circumstance for any reason.

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

#172

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 agree it should never, ever be used in any capacity when it comes to criminal proceedings, but as an employment requirement, I think the 3-letter agencies should keep them, and I suspect they will unless/until they perhaps obtain some literal mind-reading technology. It's a psychological tactic, and is all about pressure. It serves as a potential deterrent and mind game that works on multiple levels. Consider it li…

Well, good luck with that. Any employer that wants me to submit to a polygraph test will have to do without me. It's beyond ridiculous that this is permitted at all.

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

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Since you don't have much in terms of rights when crossing a border I wondered why they even bother with the pretext. To find other "bycatch" - cash to confiscate, for example, or the gun that might be forgotten after the last hunting ride, or a pack of medicine without a prescription. In the end it's a game of probability - assume that out of 1000 cars 1% (10 cars) have something that's not an illegal drug, but st…

Can't they search for those anyway? It is the pretext that I don't get. You can't refuse the search. So just get it over with and leave the dog out of it.

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

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it should never, ever be used in any capacity when it comes to criminal proceedings, but as an employment requirement, I think the 3-letter agencies should keep them, and I suspect they will unless/until they perhaps obtain some literal mind-reading technology. It's a psychological tactic, and is all about pressure. It serves as a potential deterrent and mind game that works on multiple levels. Consider it li…

Well, good luck with that. Any employer that wants me to submit to a polygraph test will have to do without me. It's beyond ridiculous that this is permitted at all.

I don't think any employer should require or request them besides the 3-letter agencies, to be clear. (I've edited my post to clarify that.) I agree it would be completely absurd for any other organization to require them, and I would never apply for a job with such a company or ever accept such a test; but I'm not someone who wants to work in intelligence or national security.

If you want to work in intelligence or national security, I think that's just one of the things you have to accept, along with being investigated and monitored and surveilled and all that. You know what you're getting into when you apply for such a job. I similarly wouldn't apply for any job that requires my employer to ask all my friends and family about my character and habits.

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

#176

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…

I think the use of a polygraph in a situation like that is disgusting, but I also think it's very different compared to making it a requirement to work for FBI/CIA/NSA.

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

#177
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 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…

But it is a placebo. That's the point of it. They know it's a placebo. If it works as a placebo, then they have no reason to stop using it. The question to ask is: does it work as a placebo? At all? Ever? If it has successfully worked as a placebo in even one instance, then it should probably be continued to be used as a hiring requirement for intelligence agencies (and for no other purpose by any other entity), in my opinion. As the other replier said, it's a deliberate trade-off of high sensitivity and low precision.

I think the parent poster is 100% right. The whole conceit of an intelligence agency is deceit. The placebo effect is probably responsible for a big portion of their overall power, in a lot of different ways, and it makes sense they'd utilize it when hiring people. The only danger is using it in any other setting, or if the examiners or people who rely on it somehow start believing the placebo isn't actually a placebo.

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

#178
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…

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 This is a bug not a feature, if everyone strapped to it are stressed out there's nothing for even a trained interrogator to read. Everyone is going to look like they're lying.

I suspect it works on many different levels and that the general stress everyone feels from it is one of those levels.

But in terms of the base "object level" of the actual graphing of multiple biometrics, the theoretical idea is to construct a baseline within the confines of the test, not between you inside and outside of the test. They let you settle in, ask you questions they know the answer to, and compare measurements during known truthful responses to measurements during or near other responses. So they're (theoretically) accounting for the added stress in the baseline.

Obviously this object-level portion of detecting honesty vs. deceit via comparison with a baseline of physiological characteristics is pseudoscientific and extremely unreliable, but it's part of the overall mind game. And even though it's pseudoscientific, it's also not like it's palm reading or something. This sounds a bit ridiculous to say, but pseudoscience is a spectrum. (For example, astrology is more pseudoscientific than MBTI.) If someone has totally normal responses to every question but a bizarrely elevated response to one single seemingly harmless question which no one else has an unusual response to, then that's something to look into and prod. So the object level of it can offer some utility.

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

#179
post #120
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes that's how it's used. That depends on people believing polygraphs work though, which is why polygraph companies for decades have been litigating against people who question polygraphs. Sometimes just the idea that there will be a polygraph test is enough to get people to be more truthful. It's like placebo drugs - if it works somehow, should we care about whether it actually works? By that reasoning, should we al…

" That depends on people believing polygraphs work though " Are you sure that's true? In medicine, apparently placebos have an effect even if you know that it's a placebo. I imagine that even if you know that it's theoretically useless, being hooked up to a machine that can read your vitals while lying would still be nerve wracking.

Having an effect is different from being able to sell a product based on that effect. For regulated fields like pharmacy, the FDA regulatory approval test requires proving efficacy against a placebo. A doctor may (under certain specific circumstances) treat a patient using a placebo (because medicine's aim is to do whatever that is necessary to alleviate the problem or reduce suffering, it is different from pure biological natural sciences/pharmacy where inferences must be backed up by scientific theory and validated by empirical evidence) but it does not necessarily mean that a placebo can be sold/marketed as a cure.

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

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since you don't have much in terms of rights when crossing a border I wondered why they even bother with the pretext. To find other "bycatch" - cash to confiscate, for example, or the gun that might be forgotten after the last hunting ride, or a pack of medicine without a prescription. In the end it's a game of probability - assume that out of 1000 cars 1% (10 cars) have something that's not an illegal drug, but st…

Can't they search for those anyway ? It is the pretext that I don't get. You can't refuse the search. So just get it over with and leave the dog out of it.

No they actually can’t in most cases. Without probable cause or permission, an officer is not allowed to execute a search. The dog is used to provide probable cause.

Also, it’s the same with letting an officer into your dwelling: Without a warrant, probable cause, or permission, they cannot legally enter.

Post reply on HN