Live data from Hacker News

Accused spy Alexander Yuk Ching Ma evidently beat the polygraph

antipolygraph.org

81–90 of 196 posts

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

#81
post #29

It's a bit of a joke, really. I doubt there's anyone reading this on here who didn't already know polygraphs don't work. The only people who don't seem to know polygraphs don't work are the ones making national security decisions relating to polygraphs.

My guess is that this works just like how it does in corporate security: It is vastly easier to add a new security policy than it is to remove it. Even when everyone knows something is useless or perhaps even harmful, nobody wants to be in a position to be held culpable on the off chance that retiring the policy is implicated in a future breach.

Polygraphs are a $2 billion industry, and Upton Sinclair said it best: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

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

#83
post #74

I know we all know that polygraphs don't work, but: is that true in practice or in principle? I mean, there are papers out there about methods capable of extracting complete words from brainwaves. Does it really seem impossible for a machine with current tech to detect signals of lying with high certainty?

"I mean, there are papers out there about methods capable of extracting complete words from brainwaves"

As far as I know, this is complete fiction right now. Same with images.

There are people currently working with AI interpreting brain signals to be reproducible, to say, move left and right in a game. It's far from working on "left" / "right", let alone anything more sophisticated than that.

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

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

let's get real, polygraphs are a ruse in order to humiliate people and see how they react in torture situations. Using them is a power play. It lets the victim know who the boss is.

Polygraphs are there to create a high-stakes stress/interrogation situation to see if someone cracks or reacts. It's more of an art form than a science -- and that's why it's not admissible as evidence in a criminal investigation (and shouldn't be) The rationale for continued use in clearance screenings is that it's not scientific, but it's better than nothing.

I don't think it is better than nothing at all. Passing a polygraph test is now potentially a false signal, giving a false sense of security to the parties concerned. Without a signal the situation would be better.

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

#86
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've talked to someone who administers polygraphs, and they said the machine is mostly theatre, but that there is normally someone watching you through a hidden camera or double sided mirror to see how you act when you think someone isn't looking. For example, when I had to take a polygraph for work, the polygrapher left the room a few times because they "needed to get a second opinion about abnormal results". That's…

That process sounds even more scientifically dubious than the demonstrably dubious machine.

right, when left alone the subject started flipping a coin (one side of which was disfigured) manically, and seeming to have an argument with themselves, sometimes shouting "you're guilty, you know it" and other times growling "those coppers will never crack me".

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

#87

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.

Let us never forget this infamous explosives 'detector':

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651

Sold to law enforcement in military around the world for a while.

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

#88
post #74

I know we all know that polygraphs don't work, but: is that true in practice or in principle? I mean, there are papers out there about methods capable of extracting complete words from brainwaves. Does it really seem impossible for a machine with current tech to detect signals of lying with high certainty?

[deleted]

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

#90

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.

While I totally agree with you, I... have a theory.

It might be psychological warfare.

I would wager that a surprisingly large number of people think that polygraphs detect lies. An even larger number are probably open to the possibility.

If you hook up somebody in that group to a polygraph, you probably rocket their stress levels through the ceiling, which might push them to crack. Behavior under stress is a fascinating thing.

Honestly, I had a snarky comment ready for a comment lower-down about the rationale for polygraphs, but I thought about it a bit, and can't, off the top of my head, come up with a faster, cheaper, and safer way to put that kind of stress on a person.

Useless against somebody trained -- like, say, an intelligence operative -- but it might not be as stupid as it appears on the surface.

Post reply on HN