The Eyes Have It

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?

Comments

Are we free?

[Mean_Nishka]

My buddy Ben Frankline summed this up the best: They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

What happens next

[adamy]

OK, 1 in 10 get A false postive. In a plane full of 280, that means that 28 people are going to be detained....I think not.

I guess if this was used as part of comprehensive screening process it might be useful....anyone who fails the test has to walk past a bomb sniffing dog or something.

Of course, the terrorists are going to be training to pass the lie detector test, so it probably won't help catch them.

This is frightening...

[Bagheera]

Considering the absolutley abysimal record of the polygraph in controlled testing (references are extensive) this is just something else we don't need. Relying on an "automatic" system is just asking for more "false faith" in a security system that doesn't work.

The article states that it's proven as effective as the existing polygraph - which is to say its reliability sucks.

Just what the world needs. Another knee-jerk deployment of a technology "to make us feel better." I suspect it'll be as effective as the National Guardsmen standing on the end of the big bridges - only far more intrusive if you happen to be one of those 10% false positives.

Re:This is frightening...

[jimbolaya]

I don't really think this is so frightening. Granted, it's record is not outstanding, but the technology is not going to be used to detain, charge, or convict anybody. If they determine somebody may be lying, they'll just be subject to additional search and scrutiny. For the 10% false positives, this will be nothing more than a minor inconvenience.

The marketing dept. wants one

[maladroit]

In Interface, by Stephen Bury (aka Neal Stephenson and his uncle), an inventor's small, portable polygraph is put to a truly noble use: Marketing.

Stephenson's got the right idea about how something like this would be used - marketing droids would flip over getting 80% honest responses in their focus groups - it beats anything they see currently. Somebody's probably making plans for the mall kiosk right now.

Time for a new Continental Congress

[perdida]

It's time for a new Continental Congress.

That is a gathering where citizens decide on a new constitution. Sort of a constitutional convention.

The government is, in this case and many others, taking responsibility for things it has no right to control.

Either we must stop the government from violating the SPIRIT of the 1st and 4th amendments, or we make a new Constitution without these freedoms.

We do have the right to abrogate these freedoms, to voluntarily give up our right to free speech and against search and seizure, but we can't give them up and "swear to uphold and defend the Constitution" in the same breath!

Will anyone else care?

[Raetsel]

Yes, they will... but how?

• Jon Katz will love it for all the material it'll generate -- just think, a whole new "Hellmouth" series!
• The (FBI | CIA | NSA) will love it because it'll allow them to assemble a biometric database of iris/cornea patterns.
• The average "Joe Citizen" will accept it because it's for protecting him from those nasty, evil terrorists.
• The (Taliban | Hezbolah | someotherfoamingidiot) will practice so they can defeat it.

• and...

• Everyone reading this comment will worry about the consequences of a false positive happening to them.

This comment has been a knee-jerk reaction. We now return you to your normal thread.

Fine, deploy the tech, but...

[e40]

There has to be serious compensation when the test fails. That is, when I go to the airport and I fail whatever "test" they give me and I'm "detained" for a few days, I want some serious cash as a result. Let's say $100,000 or more. That'll make Big Brother think twice about testing me.

Same Theory as Polygraph

[xonker]

This sounds like it works the same way as a polygraph test -- if you have a physical response to lying, basically caused by a panic response then the machine can detect it. If you're a sociopath that doesn't have that response...nada. Polygraphs don't detect your guilt or innocence, they detect your reaction to the question. I'm reasonably sure that if I shot someone, but felt good about having done it, that I'd be able to sail through a polygraph (or this test) with flying colors.

If the paranoia continues we'll all be flying naked without carry-ons in a few months. (Perhaps the airlines would issue something similar to hospital gowns...) On the plus side, being surrounded by naked people might help me with my phobia of flying. I've flown since 9/11 and I'm still more worried about a wing falling off than I am about terrorists...

Re:Small numbers ~= B.S.

[mark-t]

Exactly... 20 people in a control group is utterly inadequate to demonstrate even proof of concept, let alone actually be ready for real world use. Those same percentages might be marginally more acceptable if they had a control group a hundred, or preferably a thousand or more times that size.

Alone it might not be worth much...

[Greyfox]

But combine it with microexpression detection and voice stress analysis (Which your financial institution may already use) and you might just have a winner.

Whoa there, calm down a second...

[asteinberg]

Now I definitely agree with everyone criticizing this system, but lets not jump to conclusions. The Yahoo article definitely does NOT definitively say that these will be used in airports. Slashdot's summary says "... may be used ...". The word "may" implies speculation, and for once it seems Slashdot's summary isn't so far from the truth. To be sure, let's examine the exact wording from the article:

Scientists have developed an instant lie detector technique which picks up mini hot flushes around the eyes and could [emphasis added] lead to truth tests becoming standard at airport check-ins.

I could just as easily say "scientists have developed a new kind of extra-powerful gun, which could lead to people using it to kill each other" (err perhaps I should have chosen a less touchy example...) How about this: "Linux makes a computer so powerful that a user could use it to do malicious things." You get the point here. Moving along in the article...

Polygraphs have long been considered [emphasis again added] for increasing security at airports but current technology, which links tiny changes in heart and breathing rates to blood pressure and sweating, takes too long to process, making it impractical for large numbers of people.

Okay, so they have considered polygraphs before, and they opted not to use them. I don't see any quotes from high-ranking airport/security people saying that this is definitely going to be implemented. So, they might think about it, but hopefully they'll come to the same conclusion I think the majority of us came to - this is FAR too inaccurate to justify its use.

Of course, with all the post-9/11 hysteria I guess I wouldn't be too surprised to see them try to implement something this ridiculous, but lets just keep in mind that they haven't decided to do that yet (of course, I do not advocate that we stop arguing).

Re:Some theories on how to beat systems like this.

[Monkeyman334]

2. Know the questions being asked in advance. Practice giving rote answers to them so you're no longer thinking about the meaning of the question when it's actually asked, much like we no longer think about how exactly we tie our shoes.

I already do this one.

Did your bag leave your possesion after you packed it?

No

Did anyone ask you to carry on their bags?

No

They're going to start having to ask questions like "Are you not not a terrorist?", "Uhhhh, no?"