Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Eyes Have It

Posted by michael on from the do-you-still-love-me dept.

Feelgood writes: "Yahoo is carrying a Reuters report that thermal imaging may be used in airports to detect liars. Shouldn't be a problem that 1 out of 4 liars will get away and 1 in 10 innocents will be incorrectly nailed." There's a UPI story about the lie detector possibilities and a blurb in Nature. From the UPI article, the inventor has a good appreciation of the ethical considerations. Will anyone else care?

6 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. Once more, for all the slow JBT's. by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative


    I would like to point out that while Aldritch Ames was in the process of getting a whole lot of US agents in the Soviet Union killed by ratting them out, he continued to pass his polygraph tests.

    There's no such thing as a lie detector. Polygraphs are voodoo, and so is this.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Once more, for all the slow JBT's. by 4n0nym0u53+C0w4rd · · Score: 3, Informative

      This technique has been used for years in psychology studies (and by bad cops on naive suspects). It's called the "Bogus Pipeline"[1]. The basic idea is that, given a quick demonstration of its effectiveness (instruct the target to tell a couple of lies, and show that the machine detects them), along with an incentive to avoid being caught (if you're honest with us, we'll be easy on you), people are more likely to behave honestly.

      [1] Jones, E. E., and Sigall, H., "The Bogus Pipeline: A New Paradigm for Measuring Affect and Attitude," Psychological Bulletin 76: 349-364, 1971.

      --

      Buy Hex-Rated Stuff, fight the DMCA!

  2. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  3. It's sounds better than a polygraph. by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Polygraphs are considered about 75% accurate, which sounds good until you consider that flipping a coin is 50% accurate.

    If they can really catch 3 out of 4 liars, and "avoid" 9 out of 10 innocents,
    (which is what the article claims inventors claim) then it's much better than 75%.
    If 1 in 100 people are "liars" then this would be nearly 90% effective.
    Which again sounds good until consider that identifying everybody as innocent would be 99% accurate.

    On the plus side, this might make wearing eye shadow a crime under the DMCA.

    Polygraphs can be beat simply by putting a thumb tack in your shoe,
    and stepping on it during the "little bad" questions and not during the "big bad" question.
    (saying that probably makes this post a violation of the DMCA ...)
    I'd bet that this device can be beat by a similar method.

  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion