4 ms·

The US Federal government still uses polygraph in the security clearance process today. In 2013, they indicted several people for teaching others how to beat th

The US Federal government still uses polygraph in the security clearance process today. In 2013, they indicted several people for teaching others how to beat the test. Here’s the DOJ press release (prepare to lose brain cells): https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/owner-polygraph-indicted-allegedly-training-customers-lir-during-federally-administered https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/owner-polygraph-indicted-alle... Clearly our government and legal system think highly enough of the technique to include it in interview processes. The NSA even has an entire production video rebuking the criticisms of polygraph. It’s not just a tool (in the eyes of the government) used to trick dumb criminals into spilling the beans.

zer8k 3y ago
Not a justification and only pure speculation but what if there's another reason? You can't think that the NSA and CIA are stupid. They know its bunk science that has been disproven 1,000 times over. But the psychological effects of being on the machine are very, very measurable. Perhaps its being used as a tool to evaluate a person in other ways. For example, you're generally not arrested for admitting to crimes like smoking weed or stealing candy bars from a gas station. But admitting to crimes, or morality divergence (such as adultery), can mean with enough effort a smart intelligence organization could manipulate you.
- foooorsyth 3y ago
  > You can't think that the NSA and CIA are stupid Au contraire
  - ch4s3 3y ago
    You’d be surprised what you can’t get a man of Yale to believe when honor is on the line.
- judge2020 3y ago
  They're not stupid but they have to maintain the shroud of "this works", both internally and externally, lest the word get out that "the intelligence community doesn't even believe in their own polygraphs"
  - foooorsyth 3y ago
    They don’t have to maintain anything. Admit it was a stupid practice and stop doing it. Maintaining appearances makes them look dumb AND stubborn AND unwilling to admit prior mistakes. Yeah, sign me up.
    - mewpmewp2 3y ago
      Interview process and courts are different though. If it is used as a vetting tool it would not be a big deal if it scores a false positive if it at the same time is able to identify at least some positives. If you have enough candidates certain accuracy may be worth it.
      - vlovich123 3y ago
        So Ouija boards, astrological sign analysis, and a random number generator should be on the table too right? After all, if it identifies at least some true positives...
      - pomatius 3y ago
        Talking about the interview process...I know you are talking about suspect police interviews, but job interviews is another space where crackpot pseudo-science and shit propietary tech such as IA pre-screening have a prominent say as well, for the worse
  - Spooky23 3y ago
    What does “this works” mean? You’re assuming it means to detect lies. Perhaps that’s not the value it brings.
  - pc86 3y ago
    The reason they're doing it is because it's national security and espionage. It's objectively better to deny 1,000 solid applicants because of something on a polygraph doesn't look right than to allow in one foreign agent, at least that's the idea. So they add this filter, it will filter out some good people but maybe it'll filter out a bad one or two. That one or two makes it worth it in their eyes. It has nothing to do with "maintaining the shroud of 'this works'" because it does work for the purpose they have. It doesn't need to be 100% accurate or admissible in court.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
judge2020 3y ago
As demonstrated in Oppenheimer, security clearance processing is not one where the US Government must obey any court or evidence rules. They can deny secret access for any reason at all. Did that case against polygraph.com ever go to trial? Sounds like a slam-dunk free speech case, but I imagine the DOJ was willing to settle for anything to avoid that being fought in open court.
- hiatus 3y ago
  It did, the defendant was sentenced to two years. https://www.lawfirmofoklahoma.com/blog/polygraph-com-owner-sentenced-to-2-years-in-federal-prison https://www.lawfirmofoklahoma.com/blog/polygraph-com-owner-s...
oceanplexian 3y ago
One of the major reasons I would never work in defense. If I have to prove my worthiness to a clearance system that’s not far off from witchcraft and magic spirits, yeah, I’m gonna pass. Good luck finding intelligent people to work that kind of job.
- foooorsyth 3y ago
  Agreed. Don’t mind them talking to my former neighbors or doing forensic accounting on my bank accounts to make sure I’m not a foreign adversary. Definitely do mind being strapped to polygraph and being forced to pretend that it’s not a complete waste of time for everyone involved. They’re filtering far more smart people than they’re filtering dummies who don’t know the device is just a prop. Can’t make stupidity a part of the hiring process when you’re offering government salary bands.
  - nukeman 3y ago
    There are plenty of cleared jobs that don’t do polygraphs. I work for a DOE contractor. Q-cleared, no poly. The vast majority of positions where I am don’t have a polygraph associated with them.
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    I managed a group of very intelligent programmers with the highest clearance available, including taking polygraphs regularly. They know it's just part of the system, and the routine. These folks have a slightly different mindset, and, I think, view procedures as important to weed out people who might cut corners, lean into their ego (how dare they make ME take a polygraph), or be careless with information. A nice side effect of this process is it selects for humility, openness, and conscientiousness. And they view the work they do as hugely important for the security of their nation. Including those who laugh at them for their chosen profession. They were some of the most professional, conscientious, diligent, and excellent technologists I've ever worked with. Definitely on par with anyone at FAANGs or startups that I've work in.
    - foooorsyth 3y ago
lozenge 3y ago
They don't use readings from the polygraph. It's more like a prop they use to try to get to your honest/embarrassing truth. You can get false confessions on a polygraph interview but you can also get them in a normal police interview eg with the Reid Technique.

zer8k 3y ago

Not a justification and only pure speculation but what if there's another reason? You can't think that the NSA and CIA are stupid. They know its bunk science that has been disproven 1,000 times over. But the psychological effects of being on the machine are very, very measurable. Perhaps its being used as a tool to evaluate a person in other ways. For example, you're generally not arrested for admitting to crimes like smoking weed or stealing candy bars from a gas station. But admitting to crimes, or morality divergence (such as adultery), can mean with enough effort a smart intelligence organization could manipulate you.

foooorsyth 3y ago
> You can't think that the NSA and CIA are stupid Au contraire
- ch4s3 3y ago
  You’d be surprised what you can’t get a man of Yale to believe when honor is on the line.
judge2020 3y ago
They're not stupid but they have to maintain the shroud of "this works", both internally and externally, lest the word get out that "the intelligence community doesn't even believe in their own polygraphs"
- foooorsyth 3y ago
  They don’t have to maintain anything. Admit it was a stupid practice and stop doing it. Maintaining appearances makes them look dumb AND stubborn AND unwilling to admit prior mistakes. Yeah, sign me up.
  - mewpmewp2 3y ago
    Interview process and courts are different though. If it is used as a vetting tool it would not be a big deal if it scores a false positive if it at the same time is able to identify at least some positives. If you have enough candidates certain accuracy may be worth it.
    - vlovich123 3y ago
      So Ouija boards, astrological sign analysis, and a random number generator should be on the table too right? After all, if it identifies at least some true positives...
    - pomatius 3y ago
      Talking about the interview process...I know you are talking about suspect police interviews, but job interviews is another space where crackpot pseudo-science and shit propietary tech such as IA pre-screening have a prominent say as well, for the worse
- Spooky23 3y ago
  What does “this works” mean? You’re assuming it means to detect lies. Perhaps that’s not the value it brings.
- pc86 3y ago
  The reason they're doing it is because it's national security and espionage. It's objectively better to deny 1,000 solid applicants because of something on a polygraph doesn't look right than to allow in one foreign agent, at least that's the idea. So they add this filter, it will filter out some good people but maybe it'll filter out a bad one or two. That one or two makes it worth it in their eyes. It has nothing to do with "maintaining the shroud of 'this works'" because it does work for the purpose they have. It doesn't need to be 100% accurate or admissible in court.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

judge2020 3y ago

As demonstrated in Oppenheimer, security clearance processing is not one where the US Government must obey any court or evidence rules. They can deny secret access for any reason at all. Did that case against polygraph.com ever go to trial? Sounds like a slam-dunk free speech case, but I imagine the DOJ was willing to settle for anything to avoid that being fought in open court.

hiatus 3y ago
It did, the defendant was sentenced to two years. https://www.lawfirmofoklahoma.com/blog/polygraph-com-owner-sentenced-to-2-years-in-federal-prison https://www.lawfirmofoklahoma.com/blog/polygraph-com-owner-s...

oceanplexian 3y ago

One of the major reasons I would never work in defense. If I have to prove my worthiness to a clearance system that’s not far off from witchcraft and magic spirits, yeah, I’m gonna pass. Good luck finding intelligent people to work that kind of job.

foooorsyth 3y ago
Agreed. Don’t mind them talking to my former neighbors or doing forensic accounting on my bank accounts to make sure I’m not a foreign adversary. Definitely do mind being strapped to polygraph and being forced to pretend that it’s not a complete waste of time for everyone involved. They’re filtering far more smart people than they’re filtering dummies who don’t know the device is just a prop. Can’t make stupidity a part of the hiring process when you’re offering government salary bands.
- nukeman 3y ago
  There are plenty of cleared jobs that don’t do polygraphs. I work for a DOE contractor. Q-cleared, no poly. The vast majority of positions where I am don’t have a polygraph associated with them.
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  I managed a group of very intelligent programmers with the highest clearance available, including taking polygraphs regularly. They know it's just part of the system, and the routine. These folks have a slightly different mindset, and, I think, view procedures as important to weed out people who might cut corners, lean into their ego (how dare they make ME take a polygraph), or be careless with information. A nice side effect of this process is it selects for humility, openness, and conscientiousness. And they view the work they do as hugely important for the security of their nation. Including those who laugh at them for their chosen profession. They were some of the most professional, conscientious, diligent, and excellent technologists I've ever worked with. Definitely on par with anyone at FAANGs or startups that I've work in.
  - foooorsyth 3y ago

lozenge 3y ago

They don't use readings from the polygraph. It's more like a prop they use to try to get to your honest/embarrassing truth. You can get false confessions on a polygraph interview but you can also get them in a normal police interview eg with the Reid Technique.