4 ms·
Polygraphs must not be used as they are completely unreliable and subject to many issues. The government does a lot of security theater and campaigns to make y
by Ms-J 11mo ago
Polygraphs must not be used as they are completely unreliable and subject to many issues.
The government does a lot of security theater and campaigns to make you believe that they are competent.
- ajross 11mo agoNonetheless waiving the theater for Bongino et. al. implies that Patel thinks the theater works, or at least that these guys were likely to fail anyway regardless of "many issues". It smells corrupt, like everything else in this administration. And IMHO that's more important than a technical critique of a particular interrogation method.
- estearum 11mo agoNo, polygraphs are bad lie detectors/truth detectors. They are perfectly fine as detectors of areas of interest for investigators to probe deeper.
- andy_ppp 11mo agoYes or to pressure you into confessing, honestly good interrogators can do this without the machinery.
- estearum 11mo agoGood carpenters can build stuff without nail guns, doesn’t mean it makes sense to use hammers.
- bathtub365 11mo agoCarpenters use hammers all the time…
- estearum 11mo agoUh yeah… just like investigators use tools other than polygraphs. The point is that just because something can be done without a specific tool does not mean you should never use the tool. I guess I should’ve added “doesn’t mean it makes sense to use hammers exclusively" for the HN pedants.
- datavirtue 11mo agoNo, because I would never talk to them.
- tbrownaw 11mo agoUnless you just never talk to anyone, how can you be sure you'd know?
- YZF 11mo agoIt's interesting to note that the scandal going on in Israel wrt/ the chief prosecutor of the IDF leaking a prisoner abuse video was uncovered in a polygraph test. "A routine Shin Bet polygraph test of a senior officer close to Military Advocate General reportedly exposed new clues about video leak, prompting Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara to order a full criminal investigation" https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bkbichbjbe https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bkbichbjbe While polygraphs are not perfect they are widely used as part of a broader set of measures. I'm not sure "must not be used" is really the right way to approach this. This person would not have been caught if it wasn't for this polygraphs screening.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- s5300 11mo ago[dead]
- bigyabai 11mo agoThat's a very peculiar non-sequitur to pick. Plus, finding "clues" could mean anything, including false leads. If the Shin Bet is resorting to interviews under duress, they really must not have much physical evidence to work with.
- YZF 11mo agoThis is standard procedure for everyone in certain roles. Presumably for the same reasons the FBI does this.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- parineum 11mo ago> A routine Shin Bet polygraph test of a senior officer close to Military Advocate General reportedly exposed new clues about video leak... It should probably read, "A senior officer exposed clues during a polygraph test..." The polygraph is a McGuffin. The interviewer applies pressure by psychologically manipulating the suspect. That's all the polygraph is, psychological manipulation.
- itronitron 11mo agoThe main point of the screening is to have a highly structured question and answer session that is recorded for posterity, and which can/will be referenced at the next screening 'n' number of years later. One could even argue that the polygraph benefits the person being screened, as it provides some additional motivation for them to take it seriously.
- themafia 11mo agoThe FBI and CIA have polygraphs. The FBI and CIA still have moles and they often times operate out of the highest levels. They're like door locks. They keep honest people honest. They provide zero security.
- varenc 11mo agoDoor locks are a deterrent that increase the difficulty and cost of a crime. If your neighbor's house is locked and yours isn't, then you're going to be more of a target. In that sense they do provide security, but of course any lock might still be defeated. Similarly, I can see how structured psychological interrogation, assisted by a polygraph, is a useful deterrent. The presence of moles doesn't negate all of its value. Just like having your house broken into once doesn't mean you'll stop using door locks.
- wat10000 11mo agoThe difference is that locks actually do work. They’re not merely a psychological trick, they actually do provide a barrier, even if one that might not be hard to defeat. Considering polygraphs don’t work at all, I have to imagine that an equally effective interrogation could be constructed without them.