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

91–100 of 196 posts

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

#91

Post by JamesSwift »

moomin wrote: 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.

The polygraph process is not a technical one, but a psychological one. The point is not to detect a lie by "registering it" on the tool, its to create a situation where a person self-elects information because they believe the machine _could_ detect a lie. Its a huge dog-and-pony show, and the poly operators play it as a big game.

So, polys _do_ sort of work, but not in the way they are presented to the public.

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

#92

Post by Clubber »

bluntfang wrote: post #38
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. It's just an interrogation technique but you need one less body on the payroll because you don't need a "good cop". Pretty much every manipulation technique used in negotiation, sales and interrogation is useless if the person it's being applied to realizes it. Polygraphs are about the lowest quality because the machine is right f-ing there for the world to see whereas with other techniques there's at least…

>Pretty much every manipulation technique used in negotiation, sales and interrogation is useless if the person it's being applied to realizes it. That is just wholly incorrect. The whole point of marketing is that it works even if you know it's happening to you. Anchoring, a common sales tactic, works even if you know they're doing it to you. You can absolutely respond to it with your own tactics if you know about i…

>The whole point of marketing is that it works even if you know it's happening to you.

The point of most advertising is selling an emotion. (Advertising is a subset of marketing) Convincing the buyer to buy a product based on projecting a feeling on or drawing an emotion from that person. This is inherently a lie and thus manipulation. Most people don't realize what's going on.

Let's use Harley Davidson as an example, there are many. Their entire pitch is being a rebel, getting away, being cool, salvaging your youth. It's not, "this is a great machine and good bargain." If most people were wholly objective about purchasing a motorcycle based on utilitarian use and cost, they probably wouldn't purchase a Harley. Advertising to the rescue. It's a brain hack.

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

#93

Post by mindfulhack »

Polygraphs are a joke for this reason among so many others: Psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists can fool them because they are able to feel zero (or are incapable of feeling any) biological fear or anxiety (i.e. 'stress response'), while telling complete lies.

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

#94

Post by furyg3 »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #13
mc32 wrote: post #7

My understanding is polygraphs are used as a tool to have people trip over themselves by using it as a prop when the administrator thinks they have something to catch them on. Now that makes me wonder, if they don’t use fMRI is it because it’s also just a prop but with more studies behind it?

Exactly. It's just an interrogation technique but you need one less body on the payroll because you don't need a "good cop". Pretty much every manipulation technique used in negotiation, sales and interrogation is useless if the person it's being applied to realizes it. Polygraphs are about the lowest quality because the machine is right f-ing there for the world to see whereas with other techniques there's at least…

This is absolutely incorrect. On day one of one of my university courses on negotiation, we did a group exercise that demonstrated anchoring. For those unaware of the concept it's that a final negotiated agreement tends to be strongly influenced by the first position (e.g. price) that is put forward.

After the exercise, we dived into how it worked and how to prepare and counter anchoring. Then we ran a slightly different, but similar, exercise. Even when highly educated students were fully aware of how anchoring worked, and that they were susceptible to it, and knowing ways to ways to counter it, deals still tended to be closer to the initial reference point.

It certainly helps to know ways in which you may be manipulated, but knowledge does not make you immune by any stretch of the imagination.

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

#95

Post by tlear »

donw wrote: post #90
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.

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 fascina…

The Wire has a great scene where they use a photocopier as a fake polygraph to crack a suspect.

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

#96

Post by abstractbarista »

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.

Yep, you can 'accidentally' beat it with decent probability.

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

#97

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

kelvin0 wrote: post #87
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.

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.

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 with actual efficacy of such a device so it seems more likely it was just collusion between purchasers and sellers to siphon tax money.

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

#99

Post by leephillips »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #97
kelvin0 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

All they have to do is say “I smelled weed.”

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

#100

Post by astine »

roel_v wrote: post #61
AdmiralGinge wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't they essentially just glorified galvanometers like the Scientology e-meter?

Yes, and I built a very simple one in law school, to illustrate the concept (well to be honest I was an engineer who went to law school as a hobby, and then I took every excuse I could find to build technology things as a hobby within a hobby). Anyway it was just a multimeter, some washers soldered to copper wire and some tape to keep the washers in their place on the subject's hands. When people didn't try to game i…

Just a guess, but I wonder if a polygraph is useful as an intimidation tactic? Maybe you can't detect lies with any sort of accuracy but you can intimidate people into making more mistake when answering questions and that can be used to figure out if someone is lying? OR perhaps they can pressure some people into revealing more information than they otherwise would?
Post reply on HN