Slashdot Mirror


DHS To Use Body Odor As a Lie Detector

The US Department of Homeland Security is studying lies, damned lies, and smells. They hope to prove that human body odor could be used to tell when people are lying. The department says they are already "conducting experiments in deceptive behavior and collecting human odor samples" and that the research it hopes to fund "will consist primarily of the analysis and study of the human odor samples collected to determine if a deception indicator can be found."

206 comments

  1. Something stinks around here by d3vi1 · · Score: 1

    First they hire a Microsoft dude, then they start smelling people.

    --
    UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
    1. Re:Something stinks around here by sgbett · · Score: 4, Funny

      They could be lining this up as the replacement for UAC!

      --
      Invaders must die
    2. Re:Something stinks around here by UbuntuLinux · · Score: 0, Funny

      Linux users have abominable personal hygiene and will overload/confuse the device. What can be done about this? Nothing - becuase it is MS technology and will be properietary, closed source and patented.

    3. Re:Something stinks around here by Chyeld · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is it sad that even after all these years and having actually been forced to upgrade to Vista, I still think of this UAC when people talk about it?

    4. Re:Something stinks around here by WTF+Chuck · · Score: 1

      And the effects of that UAC are different from Microsoft's UAC how? OK, I will grant that no one has actually exploded yet.

      --
      Note - Liberal use of <sarcasm> tags may or may not need to be applied.
    5. Re:Something stinks around here by stewbacca · · Score: 4, Funny

      I went to a Magic, the Gathering regional tournament. The place was packed with liars! Same goes for the local comic book store, evidently.

    6. Re:Something stinks around here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OH I would just love encountering them with this. I am allergic to every deodorant/antiperspirant I've ever tried that actually worked. I just take a lot of baths but if they're gonna measure how bad I smell after I've been put through their bullshit, I'm gonna fail miserably. Yet another reason I plan on never investing another dollar in air travel. I'll take boats, trains or automobiles before I fly commercial again; yes, even to Europe or Japan.

    7. Re:Something stinks around here by Shark · · Score: 1

      Well, that might have been the breakthrough... They hire a stinkin' MS exec and find out that he lies all the time. Since with the DHS, correlation is causation, it was only natural to come up with the technology.

      --
      Mind the frickin' laser...
    8. Re:Something stinks around here by Ackmo · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am allergic to every deodorant/antiperspirant I've ever tried that actually worked.

      Liar.

    9. Re:Something stinks around here by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Have you tried deodorant rocks? They work excellent if you don't sweat a lot (don't know how they work otherwise), they don't stain anything, and one $5 stick has lasted me for over a year and a half so far.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    10. Re:Something stinks around here by Hordeking · · Score: 1

      Is it sad that even after all these years and having actually been forced to upgrade to Vista, I still think of this UAC when people talk about it?

      No, because I thought of the same thing. Ipso facto, E pluribus unum, YMMV.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions and actions of the US Gov't are in no way representative of those held by this author or its ci
    11. Re:Something stinks around here by Reziac · · Score: 1

      If I ever had a Vista/Win7 machine, I'm afraid my wallpaper would be the UAC logo... for that very reason!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    12. Re:Something stinks around here by Garridan · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight.

      * You don't sweat a lot
      * You bought a rock
      * You rubbed the rock in your armpit
      * You don't stink because you don't sweat a lot

      Y'know... you could just cut out the middle steps. Also, what if he's allergic to rocks?

    13. Re:Something stinks around here by treeves · · Score: 1

      I can just see it on product labels...
      "This product manufactured in a plant that also processes tree nuts, soy, milk, wheat, and rocks."

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    14. Re:Something stinks around here by Meski · · Score: 1

      So the next time, when you shower, you get your rocks off?

  2. Fix the thumbnail, sam.. by Swift+Kick · · Score: 2, Informative

    It breaks the main page.
    C'mon, it's not that hard to resize it before posting.

    --
    "We'll need 2000 crickets, 4 cans of Easy Cheese, and the fluid from 18 glowsticks for this plan to work...." - ph0n1c
    1. Re:Fix the thumbnail, sam.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I second that, it makes these articles look very odd. May be they need to have resized images that enlarge on mouse over or on mouse click or something.

  3. it might work in some situations.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    investigator: Suspect A, did you just fart?
    suspect A: no! ..

    1. Re:it might work in some situations.. by zappepcs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Welcome to the Gitmo halitosis holding area. In order to pass your odor testing, you'll be required to eat only TexMex food for the next 21 days. If after that time you still fail, you'll be given permanent quarters on the other side of the facility.

      You newcomers should take note. nobody likes terrorists. To show support of American, this holding area is sponsored by Scott bathroom tissue and The Fox news network. Please try to avoid shitting yourself stupid.

    2. Re:it might work in some situations.. by Comboman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lawyer: I refer you to the case of Smelt It vs Dealt It.

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    3. Re:it might work in some situations.. by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Funny

      Objection! I move for immediate dismissal on the grounds of He Who Said the Rhyme Did the Crime!

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  4. Should be cheap! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    All they need to collect the samples is already at hand.

    Before you say Congress may help, no chance. The rarest resource on the planet is politician sweat.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Should be cheap! by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >>>All they need to collect the samples is already at hand.

      It just dawned on me. Collecting "scent samples" is the same thing the East German government did. For every citizen. Is Homeland Security taking us down that same road?

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    2. Re:Should be cheap! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that was a different reason. And pointless too.

      They took "smell samples" from prisoners, to track them down with dogs. What they didn't know (or didn't want to know, you'll never be sure) was that dogs don't really track using the scent of the "game", they follow the trail it leaves on the ground until late in the hunt. And by the time the dogs are close enough to pick the target out by scent, you can use visual identification (i.e. see him).

      In total, a huge load of bullcrap. In other words, fits nicely.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Should be cheap! by silentsteel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, no. Every creature on earth has an unique scent. Scent will actually come out of a human being, or other "game" in cone shaped form. This is why search and rescue units will work a patch of land moving in the expected cone shape (based on what the dog picks up) when trailing a victim in a search. I have done search and rescue and that is the logic they use because it works. The first thing they do when a new volunteer comes on is show them how it works. Tracking, what you were referring to, also uses the same concept but, with the individual scent being left by brushing against the ground itself.

      In a nutshell, this scares the hell out of me.

      --
      I cut it three times, and it's still too short.
    4. Re:Should be cheap! by russotto · · Score: 1

      It just dawned on me. Collecting "scent samples" is the same thing the East German government did. For every citizen. Is Homeland Security taking us down that same road?

      ROTFL. Welcome to the world most of us have been living in since late 2001 (official tinfoil-hat wearing paranoids longer than that). The major consolation is that Homeland Security will never be as competent as the Stasi.

      (unless they're faking the blundering appearance to conceal a well oiled oppression machine.... naa, that's too paranoid even for me)

    5. Re:Should be cheap! by silentsteel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For those that are wondering why this would scare me, coming from the perspective of search and rescue: Well-trained dogs who get the scent from something that the person they are searching for was physically touching at some point recent to the search, will hit on that person 999 times out of 1000. The prospect of a scent being put into a database to be pulled out by an algorithm leaves the possibility that there could be massive error before a dog ever gets to scent off of the sample. Or they could use a machine, and I for one do not trust a machine to be right 99.9 percent of the time, in a situation like this.

      --
      I cut it three times, and it's still too short.
    6. Re:Should be cheap! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      They decided to take "History Repeats Itself" rather literally. They just need to rename DHT and we're all set.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  5. Hello, is that an armpit hoover? by Ronald+Dumsfeld · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hello, is that an armpit hoover? Or are you just pleased to see me?

    I always make an effort to shower or bathe before I have a flight, especially if it is long-haul.

    Now, I don't particularly care for the idea of a 'lie-sniffer', as it is just more tin-foil-hattery from leeches who can demand government funding to 'fight teh terrorists'. However, if they keep the guy that is a couple of hundred pounds overweight, and hasn't washed for a week, off the plane - I'll be happy.

    --
    Where's the Kaboom?
    There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
    1. Re:Hello, is that an armpit hoover? by the_fat_kid · · Score: 1

      Pull back to Jay Sherman with a screen behind him,
            "It stinks!"

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
  6. Best reply by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I take the 5th amendment" or "I choose to remain silent"

    Don't give the government anything, else they will use it later to entrap you or jail you. The right to free speech also includes the right to be quiet.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:Best reply by howardd21 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That is great if you have time to be escorted to the security area for further questioning and investigation, but they are not going to let you get on a plane with that answer.

      --
      no comment
    2. Re:Best reply by mb10ofBATX · · Score: 1

      But what happens when you're silent but deadly? They're sure to find you out with this new tech.

    3. Re:Best reply by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>they are not going to let you get on a plane with that answer.

      And that's one of the key reasons I don't fly (unless I'm going a long distance). It's too damned inconvenient. I'd rather just drive my own car, which gives me lots of legroom, lots of space for luggage, and my own personal stereo system for music or books-on-ipod listening.

      Example: My coworkers flew from OKC to Minneapolis. I drove. They left home at 6 am and arrived at their hotel at 5 pm. I arrived about an hour later, but did not have to deal with security assholes, uncomfortable seats, lost/damaged luggage, or rude taxi drivers. Plus I got to pocket ~$1200 cash from my company (reimbursement for mileage). A nice pleasant road trip.

      Give me the freedom/comfort of a car any day.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    4. Re:Best reply by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>But what happens when you're silent but deadly? They're sure to find you out with this new tech.

      The Supreme Law of the Land says, "No person shall be... compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself". Any evidence they collect from your scent can not be used in court.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    5. Re:Best reply by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Informative

      Give me the freedom/comfort of a car any day.

      Be careful, some of our more extremist friends on the left want to take that freedom away from you too. We should tax gasoline until it's $5/gal and force everybody to ride mass transit that may or may not exist, don't you know?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    6. Re:Best reply by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Well, okay, but here's the simple fact: DHS pulls aside for additional questioning or searches fewer than 10% of all passengers. If you don't want to be searched or questioned, simply don't give them a reason to do so.

      In this case, there is plenty you can to alter your body odor. For example, wear a body powder containing baking soda. Baking soda absorbs odors, thereby giving them less odor to measure.

    7. Re:Best reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Petrol at only $5 a gallon, that's a distant memory here in the UK. Quit whining.

    8. Re:Best reply by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      If they ever let you get to court....

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:Best reply by lupinstel · · Score: 1

      I believe more treaties recognize "He who smelt it, dealt it."

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Cthulhu.
    10. Re:Best reply by xelah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, okay, but here's the simple fact: DHS pulls aside for additional questioning or searches fewer than 10% of all passengers. If you don't want to be searched or questioned, simply don't give them a reason to do so.

      That may be OK individually, but generally (not just with smells and aeroplanes) it's a dangerous route to go down collectively. Only a few are questioned, so everyone tries to conform to what they think the authorities consider normal. So the authorities lower their thresholds and then everyone becomes even more conforming, etc. It leads to everyone 'self-censoring' their behaviour to some degree to please government and security guard's prejudices.....it's far better for people to feel secure against unreasonable harrassment. It's not that your suggestion is necessarily bad - but if you can be bothered with baking soda then you ought to also be bothered opposing it politically.

    11. Re:Best reply by Archimonde · · Score: 1

      I can understand the hassles of using the public airplane, but driving for ~11 hours is madness. There is no way one can convince me that you arrived in better shape then your coworkers, and at least driving for that much time is frankly extremely boring (can't sleep/surf/whatever at the time) and dangerous (fatigue etc).

      --
      Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
    12. Re:Best reply by xaxa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Going with Google Maps' predictions, he drove for about 12 hours straight, a distance of 785 miles.

      Land's End, Cornwall (the most south-westerly point of Great Britain) to Inverness (most northerly city in Scotland) is only 730 miles.

      Many people in the UK would fly that distance -- though it would be awkward, both places are very remote. But our alternative -- a train, with lots of legroom, space for luggage, a table, a power point for your laptop, a toilet etc -- doesn't really exist in the USA, outside a few locations.

      (A train from Land's End (Penzance) to Inverness takes 14 hours, or 16 hours if you take a sleeper train overnight.)

    13. Re:Best reply by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      A) This is the DHS, which means they usually don't try people, they "detain" people. No trial necessary.

      B) When you're crossing a border, if you don't fully answer their questions, the best you can hope for is to get sent back.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    14. Re:Best reply by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      This is the DHS, which means they usually don't try people, they "detain" people. No trial necessary.

      I'm as staunch of a civil libertarian as anyone but this statement still annoys me. To the best of my knowledge DHS is just another bloated ineffective Federal bureaucracy more interested in justifying their existence than anything else. The actions of our intelligence agencies and military are another matter altogether but do you have any evidence that DHS has started detaining people without trial?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    15. Re:Best reply by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 1

      Any evidence they collect from your scent can not be used in court.

      Yeah, like with DNA and fingerprints.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    16. Re:Best reply by popeye44 · · Score: 1

      Gotta love California, 770 miles long. We take driving for granted here. One of the reasons is you can't get a train from Sacramento to LA. or from SF to LA. I've ridden Amtrak from Bakersfield to Seattle and really enjoyed it but not being able to take one south of Bakersfield is idiocy.

      Gattaca like world here we come. Smell ya later.

      --
      Inane Comments are Generously Disregarded
    17. Re:Best reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your company would rather reimburse you $1200 than buy you a $400 plane ticket, all so you don't have to deal with "security assholes"? Who do you work for? Sounds like a sweet deal.

    18. Re:Best reply by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And that's one of the key reasons I don't fly (unless I'm going a long distance). It's too damned inconvenient. I'd rather just drive my own car, which gives me lots of legroom, lots of space for luggage, and my own personal stereo system for music or books-on-ipod listening.

      I'm so glad I"m not the only one who does this - co-workers look at me like I'm crazy when I say I'm driving instead of flying (up to 12-14 hours is my 'reasonable limit').

      Between the hassle of "security", the cramped seats designed for people 6 inches shorter than me, the noise, being treated like cattle and the hundred other little things that make flying absolutely detestable... it's worth an extra couple-few hours of my time to enjoy my travel in comfort. I do take a mid- to high-end rental though, instead of my car - that lets me justify it to the company as being cheaper than a plane ticket anyway.

    19. Re:Best reply by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      I can understand the hassles of using the public airplane, but driving for ~11 hours is madness. There is no way one can convince me that you arrived in better shape then your coworkers, and at least driving for that much time is frankly extremely boring (can't sleep/surf/whatever at the time) and dangerous (fatigue etc).

      .. for you. Everyone's limits are different. I do the same thing, and arrive much less stressed than my colleagues even if more tired.

    20. Re:Best reply by kilgortrout · · Score: 1

      Better yet, choose to remain silent but deadly.

    21. Re:Best reply by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      "I take the 5th amendment" or "I choose to remain silent"

      Just don't slip up and say, "I choose to remain silent but deadly."

      On the plus side, "He who smelt it dealt it" is now a valid legal defense when accused of terrorism based on smell alone.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    22. Re:Best reply by Reziac · · Score: 1

      You can, sortof -- you just have to take the bus from Bakersfield to Lancaster, and from there the commuter train will take you into downtown L.A.

      I admit it's rather silly, considering that the tracks already exist. Rail freight uses 'em every day.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    23. Re:Best reply by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You can't even take a train from Reno to Las Vegas. and there is track all the way AND a large station in both cities.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    24. Re:Best reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dare you! You're a thoughtcriminal and I'm reporting you to the authorities!!!!

    25. Re:Best reply by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      DHS runs ICE, which operates a number of detention facilities, not to mention the numerous "black sites" that exist around the world. (This would be the CIA in most cases, if you want to get technical, though I don't know if they were in charge of Maher Arar's case.)

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    26. Re:Best reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, okay, but here's the simple fact: DHS pulls aside for additional questioning or searches fewer than 10% of all passengers. If you don't want to be searched or questioned, simply don't give them a reason to do so.

      Seriously? I'll go tell my wife to go bleach her skin so she will give DHS a reason to stop harassing her. She is a natural born American citizen of Latin descent. Her skin is light enough to be mistaken for being Arabic. We fly often and she gets pulled to the side 90% of the time for extra screening/questions.

    27. Re:Best reply by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      "Less stressed" is the key. On the return trip, we left a day early, so they had to contact the airline and exchange their original tickets for new tickets..... and ended-up sitting around doing nothing for half a day because the new flight didn't leave until the afternoon. When I talked to them I learned they did not get home until around midnight.

      I simply walked over to my car said "Seeya guys later" and was home in time to enjoy a relaxing evening watching Smallville and Supernatural.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  7. Consumer version, please ... by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Funny

    After all, it would be nice to be able to say that Office Depot's policy of lying to customers literally STINKS!

    So how are they going to calibrate this?

    Your Stink-o-Lie-Meter
    1. Kid with hand in cookie jar
    10. Madoff with hand in cookie jar
    66. Used car salesman
    666: Bush "They Have WMDs" salesman
    2. "No, the dress doesn't make you look fat."
    0. "It's not the dress."
    9. "It's not the dress, and I ENJOY sleeping on the couch!"
    4. It's a bug (it's not a "bug" - it didn't crawl in on its' own volition - fess up and admit you made a mistake).
    40. It's a feature.
    0. "They're real." (It's none of your business, Jack!)
    9. "I didn't forget your birthday."
    500. "We have a plan to deal with the current financial crisis" - ANY POLITICIAN - we KNOW you're just making this sh*t up as you go along.
    499. "Bankruptcy is not an option." - GM head honcho Ron Wagoner

    1. Re:Consumer version, please ... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      99999 - "*I* *did* *not* *have* sexual relations with *that* *woman*!"

    2. Re:Consumer version, please ... by moteyalpha · · Score: 1

      Certainly, it is ridiculous and a waste of money. However if it did work, would the cake smell like a lie?

    3. Re:Consumer version, please ... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      99999 - "*I* *did* *not* *have* sexual relations with *that* *woman*!"

      So you think that Clinton's lie about a blowjob was more than 150 times as bad as Bush's lie about WMDs?

      Dear God.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:Consumer version, please ... by bdenton42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, yes it was. Clinton is smart and knew he was mincing words. Bush has never shown such adeptness and may have been completely clueless about it rather than deceptive.

    5. Re:Consumer version, please ... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Why is that every time I post a political joke, people automatically assume I'm being partisan?

      Sir, I am an equal opportunity politician basher. I don't care if politicians are conservative, liberal, Republican, Democrat or Communist. They all deserve to be made fun of.

      99999 - *Read* *my* *lips*: *No* *New* *Taxes*

    6. Re:Consumer version, please ... by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      99999 - *Read* *my* *lips*: *No* *New* *Taxes*

      He said no NEW taxes, nothing about increasing the ones we got!

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  8. As Seen on TV! by KefkaZ · · Score: 1

    Lie Away: Smell like a politician without the hassle of cheating constituents. Now available in Dick Cheney, Nixon, and Bernie Madoff scents.

  9. Something by igy · · Score: 1

    Something's definitely fishy about that guy's answers...

  10. A pack of dogs by mc1138 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just looking to smell the fear on you. Will it be able to tell if someone is actually lying or just really nervous that they're being questioned by a federal agency?

    1. Re:A pack of dogs by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 3, Informative

      Will they care? The primary motivation is arrest statistics, and acting nervous infront of a federal agent is, by itself, probably enough for that.

    2. Re:A pack of dogs by yttrstein · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It won't be able to reliably tell anything about anyone, except perhaps that they were a little bit nervous about something, just *exactly* the same way current lie detectors do.

      The problem with lie detection, as quite a number of people have said endlessly over the years, is that the assumption is made that a lie is something that somehow the body has a physiological problem with. Clearly this is swan songs of morality, as amorphous and dynamic as they are, being applied directly to the human nervous system, and somehow people are surprised to discover that there hasn't been a lie detector in the world that's been proven unquestionably to work at all.

    3. Re:A pack of dogs by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      How can you doubt our national intelligence agencies when they have "intelligence" right in their name?!?!? I predict this will be their most effective law enforcement and intelligence tool since the U.S. government created the Stargate Project. It's tax dollars well spent!

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:A pack of dogs by olddotter · · Score: 1

      The problem with lie detection, as quite a number of people have said endlessly over the years, is that the assumption is made that a lie is something that somehow the body has a physiological problem with. Clearly this is swan songs of morality, as amorphous and dynamic as they are, being applied directly to the human nervous system, and somehow people are surprised to discover that there hasn't been a lie detector in the world that's been proven unquestionably to work at all.

      That is a very insightful comment. Apparently these people don't read the research papers that imply that learning to lie, and detect lies in others is part of the driver for human intelligence. But of course that requires you to believe in evolution....

    5. Re:A pack of dogs by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The stargate project was not a waste.

      There was a lot of reports about physic phenomenon from both domestic and foreign entities.

      They investigated it, it didn't work out and they moved on.
      No different then, say, the atomic bomb, except when evidence backed the theory, they continued on.

      Now, if the did continue it until 1995, that was too long and a wast of a couple of million bucks. I need another source beside wikipedia to confirm that date. I know a lot of projects got cut in the 70's.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:A pack of dogs by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      More likely is it worked, and they officially "canceled" it, but in fact, took in underground in the "black budget" and are making use of it today.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  11. detection speed by slackoon · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wonder about detection rate. If someone is lying, how long would it take to detect the lie based on body odour, it's not like it would change in a second. This makes me wonder just how useful this would be?

    1. Re:detection speed by rabbitfood · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depending on the sort of molecule they're sniffing for, and the detection method, traces in the parts-per-billion range can be detected almost instantly. The limitation is often the speed at which you can get a billion bits of air through your nozzle - or the wind-speed your detection method can withstand. Honeybees, for example, make good detectors in some circumstances, but get miffed in moderate breezes and refuse to work at all if you blow their antennae off.

      However, even if they have to parcel up the smells and post them to a lab in Wisconsin, it'll still be quicker and probably cheaper than six years in Cuba.

      As for usefulness, I don't think that's the point. It's not meant to be useful, it's meant to give the government a justification for the presumption of guilt. Although the Bill of Rights and the Majesty of the Law are worthy of respect, they are historical throwbacks that aren't always appropriate for a fast-changing world. Any device that can improve the efficiency of justice, even indirectly, must be welcomed by hard-pressed taxpayers.

    2. Re:detection speed by Tanktalus · · Score: 1

      +1, Kool-aid

    3. Re:detection speed by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 1

      ...but get miffed in moderate breezes and refuse to work at all if you blow their antennae off.

      LOL. I am sure what you are saying makes sense within a given context but I am not sure what that context is.

      All I can see is very disgruntled bees, bitching about management when it is breezy and bees on strike if you blow off their antnnae. Presumably with a mini hand-gun, I guess. =D

  12. I thought the US had stopped French-bashing by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2, Funny
    This stuff about body odour is clearly an attack on the French.

    Since France is about to join NATO (which of course they call OTAN) this could lead to serious diplomatic incidents.

    "You, Sir, are a dirty liar! The machine says so!"

    "Sale espece de cochon, I have simply had snails in garlic with a bottle of Burgundy for lunch."

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  13. A little joke to make you think by fmachado · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Brazil and Argentina have historical disputes over who is the "best" on South America. Obviously it leads to some funny jokes on either side.

    One closely related to USA auto induced paranioa state of mind says that an "argentino" and a "brasileiro" found a lamp. The argentino rubbed the lamp first but the brasileiro hold the lamp for him to do it. A genius emerged and saw the problem immediately: he could not grant 3 wishes, one of them would get 2 wishes and other 1. So he granted 2 wishes, one for each of them. Since the argentino rubbed the lamp first, he wished a great wall would appear on all Argentina frontiers so they could be isolated from the bad interference of their neighbors, being Argentina the greatest nation of all. Wish granted, the genius made a wall one mile high around all Argentina. Next the genius asked the brazilian what was his wish. He asked the genius before anything if the Argentina's wall was really high and resistant. The genius answered that nothing could break that wall. The brasileiro asked immediately: fill it with water.

    USA is almost asking for problems when they think all the world want to attck them when USA is the most common attacker or influencer on all wars from World War II and later. They must take care with what they wish: it can be granted.

    Disclaimer: I'm brazilian, so the joke is biased.

    1. Re:A little joke to make you think by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      That joke makes me very sad. I have a genius IQ, and yet I can't grant wishes.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:A little joke to make you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A big wall, eh? That'd make the US an even better place to store Americans than it is now.

    3. Re:A little joke to make you think by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      when USA is the most common attacker or influencer on all wars from World War II and later.

      How was the USA the "most common attacker or influencer" in WW2 when we remained completely neutral until 1940 (destroyers for bases) and didn't actually enter the war until attacked (Pearl Harbor)?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:A little joke to make you think by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

      Just to play devil's advocate... it's called "lend-lease" and "naval blockades." Continue.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    5. Re:A little joke to make you think by russotto · · Score: 1

      USA is almost asking for problems when they think all the world want to attck them when USA is the most common attacker or influencer on all wars from World War II and later.

      Let's see. WWII... main attackers and influencers were Japan and Germany. The US did a lot of attacking late in the war and quite a lot of influencing earlier, but it takes some serious revisionism to put the US ahead of the two main Axis powers. Korea started with an invasion of the US-backed South by the North. Vietnam started as a French conflict. The US gets "influence" for Afghanistan, but the Soviets did the main attacking. Even Gulf War I started with an invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. Nicaragua was a proxy war, so you might count that as "influence" again. (And who knows how to count the Bay of Pigs?) The US was the main attacker in the Panama invasion, the Grenada invasion, and in Gulf War II, and probably some other conflicts I've neglected, but hardly "all wars". Believe it or not, there have also been quite a few wars the US wasn't even involved in at all.

    6. Re:A little joke to make you think by neomunk · · Score: 1

      It's a rare "genius" indeed that doesn't comprehend that English isn't the Universal First Language.

      Self-proclaimed geniuses that are actually arrogant average folk who are smart only when compared to their dumbass friends are a dime-a-dozen however.

      Just something to think about.

    7. Re:A little joke to make you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's fairly obvious that the GP wanted to draw the attention of the GGP to the fact that he means "genie" where he wrote "genius" using humour instead of the more common slashdot response "wrong word ur idit". Which would not necessitate that he really be a genius in real life.

      Although the fact that his humour is lost on some, would hint strongly that perhaps he is.

    8. Re:A little joke to make you think by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Just to play devil's advocate... it's called "lend-lease" and "naval blockades." Continue.

      Neither of which started until 1941. Destroyers for bases actually predated both of those in 1940 which is why I mentioned it. You'll note that the war started in 1939. So once again, please explain to me how America influenced the outbreak of WW2.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:A little joke to make you think by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      Well, we 'influenced' events in WW II,Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Iraq 1, Afghanistan, Iraq 2, and more. We didn't start most of them, but I think we could be called a more prolific 'attacker' during those conflicts, as that is a vague term. I'm not sure that's quite what the OP meant. It appears that English is not his first language (which is ok, not criticizing) and that the sentence was poorly worded and poorly researched flamebait.

    10. Re:A little joke to make you think by fmachado · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ok, let me explain some things: yes, I used genius word wrongly, should be "genie" (in portuguese they are translated to the same word, sorry).

      Second: about USA position as being the bigger influencer and/or attacker since WWII. Can you just count WWI as 1 conflict and count all big conflicts that happened from WWII up to today? I was trying to say that almost every conflict from 1945 to now has USA deeply entrenched or playing behind curtains. Say Vietnan, Korea, Iraq (2 times), Israel, Lebanon (helping Israel), Afghanistan (2 times), Cold War (ok, not a conflict, just almost one, god bless), and whatever conflict you choose (with exception to some tribe conflicts on Africa). Are you sure any other nation, even old Soviet Union or new Russia or Israel can stand above USA in this infamous dispute?

      Ok, let's see: Vietnan started as a French conflict, but USA got there (objective: get mineral resources); Afghanistan started with Russia but USA got there to counter all the influence from Russia (Cold War) and got there again after some towers got down; Kuwait (I was forgetting it) got invaded by Iraq and USA (wanting to ensure oil would not get too expensive and to keep it available) got there; then, after some towers got down, USA decide it was time to fake some reports and go after Iraq again (to get all oil this time); Nicaragua, Panama and Grenada was there just to counter URSS. See, not even the Soviets could ever get close to USA. And I did not count all Israel backing on every conflict they got involved. Like I said, every major conflict known to us has USA in some "privileged" position or playing "World Police" (see North Korea, Libia and a lot of others).

      My intention was to show that a paranoid state is not a good response but an expected one from a country that made a lot of enemies and consider eveyone as potential enemy. The better response should not be "every stranger is a potential terrorist" but "let's try to smooth things out" with everyone you can. Good faith and a real demonstration of change can make wonders in destroying terrorist arguments that USA is the representative of Satan on earth (an argument used a lot by terrorists). People all over the world got on USA side cause they were the victims on 09/11 events. The terrorists got arguments of being victims (at least for the population they wanted to influence) when Iraq got attacked for nothing more than oil greed, for example.

      I'm not on the side of the terrorists in any way, they are wrong on every aspect, in my opinion. What I'm trying to show is that excluding all the world and making everyone suspicious of trying to destroy USA is not the answer. You can get your wish granted (by a GENIE or by everyone else) and people just exclude USA too. Bad for everyone, worse for USA.

      Sorry for any other language or expression error I did, english is NOT my main language (brazilian portuguese is, for reference).

    11. Re:A little joke to make you think by Reziac · · Score: 1

      The REAL moral of this story:

      Always let the OTHER guy wish FIRST.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    12. Re:A little joke to make you think by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 1

      should be "genie" (in portuguese they are translated to the same word, sorry).

      Are they really? I can't imagine that Genie (==Djinn, a supernatural fiery creature which possesses free will) would or could be used so interchangeably with genius (==someone who has exceptional intellectual ability and originality).

      They have such entirely separate meanings that, aside from their superficially close English spelling, it is strange to think that they would be translated to the same word. What language is Portugeuese based upon? Thinking that it may be Latin, I searched on the meaning of geni, thinking there might be some commonality there. The answer would be no. In the Latin, geni relates to the knee.

      (PS. I am a native English speaker (have a B.S. in English) with no knowledge of Portuguese and am genuinely curious.)

    13. Re:A little joke to make you think by neomunk · · Score: 1

      Having someone point out that your joke is in poor taste doesn't mean someone missed the joke. In fact, if you find such simple word-play to be the hint of genius, well, I just hope you aren't a hiring manager anywhere.

      I'm not saying that the OP is an idiot, or even average (I have no idea), but the joke WAS a shining example of mediocrity.

  14. A bad day for Linux users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Time to wash, boys!

    1. Re:A bad day for Linux users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I shower every night, you insensitive clod!

  15. seems silly by redhat_redneck · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I know personally that body odor differs by race, diet, and culture. Is that to say that if I eat at my local Pakstani resturant the night before trying to use the BO biometric, I may be identified as a Pashtun tribal warlord? Does this take into account that prescription medication could cause a change? Just by taking an antibiotic could I cause a false positive? I hate to think loading up on ginger or curry or treating an infection could mean I end up on the waterboard. This seems as useful as gait recognition. http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/GAIT.htm .... That really went nowhere and I seem to remember a massively huge database - like 2PB. But who am I to judge apparently nows the time to push for funding on crap projects.

  16. My god! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "He farted! He is a terrorist!"

  17. Beanz meanz fartz by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they want odour, let them have it, full throttle. Eat chilli beans with garlic and cream cheese (or whatever supercharges your afterburner) a few hours before boarding a flight.
    "I fart in your general direction! In fact, I fart uncontrollably in all directions!"

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by Spazztastic · · Score: 1

      If they want odour, let them have it, full throttle. Eat chilli beans with garlic and cream cheese (or whatever supercharges your afterburner) a few hours before boarding a flight. "I fart in your general direction! In fact, I fart uncontrollably in all directions!"

      I seriously wonder if you could be denied onto a flight because of having uncontrollable flatulence. Only one way to find out...

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    2. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by jimicus · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can be denied entry onto a flight for any reason whatsoever - even "the security inspector x-raying your hand luggage didn't get laid last night".

    3. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      Not in my related experience. Or if they could, they don't. The gate agent probably doesn't care, as they won't be on the airplane. Their motive is probably to get the person (ok, me) away from them as quickly as possible, and that's down the ramp to the airplane.

    4. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      I was once on a Southwest flight and as we were taxiing a fat kid in the row behind me let a huge fart and was laughing with his friends about it. It was one of the stinkier ones I've smelt. Anyway, we pulled onto the runway, and then we pulled right back off the runway almost immediately. The pilot got on the horn and said "As you can see, we've pulled off the runway. We just got a call here in the cockpit from our flight attendant. They say someone let off a stink bomb back there. That behavior WILL stop, or we will go back to the terminal and eject whoever did it from the plane. They will be escorted by the airport police to a holding cell where they will face charges of interference with the operation of an airliner. If it happens in flight, I will land the plane immediately and have the local police take you off the plane.

      The pilot let that sink in for about a minute then we took off.

      So yea, no only could you be denied, but you could be in a lot of trouble. This was BEFORE 9/11, BTW.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    5. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      If they want odour, let them have it, full throttle. Eat chilli beans with garlic and cream cheese (or whatever supercharges your afterburner) a few hours before boarding a flight.

      I have a picture of a middle-aged man, sitting in a cramped airliner and giggling uncontrollably every few minutes whilst his seatmates grow more green by the second...

    6. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      I seriously wonder if you could be denied onto a flight because of having uncontrollable flatulence. Only one way to find out...

      I dunno, were you given a grant to check the feasibility of weaponising your farts? If so, then probably...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    7. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by arminw · · Score: 1

      ....I seriously wonder if you could be denied onto a flight because of having uncontrollable flatulence.....

      Probably not unless you tell a really stinky lie. This is because lies come out of the mouth, but only true stinks emanate from the other end.

      --
      All theory is gray
    8. Re:Beanz meanz fartz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can be denied entry onto a flight for any reason whatsoever

      And not just average citizens, but our own soldiers. This medic soldier was stopped for bringing a bottle of Sprite through the check point then a TSA agent pulls rank on him pretending to be a lieutenant in the army. He missed his plane, went back for answers, was pulled aside and beaten/tasered.

      The one that beat/tasered him was promoted.

  18. Same as always by aepervius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Polygraph, and other assorted gadget do NOT detect lie. Ever. What they possibly detect is stress, (fear and its little cousin nervousness for example) which in some case may or may not be correlated to a lie. It is all based on putting the idea that "it works" in the mind of people it tests, and indeed sometimes law enforcement get confession from people (they CAN use the confession but may not use any lie detector crap, and recently even that was put under fire). There isn't really a good scientific background on it The Lie behind the lie detector.

    Using odor instead of breathing heart beat and so on will not bring anymore science is this than pissing into a violin and expecting a concerto.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Same as always by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lie detectors of all types detect if you think you are lying and are stressed by this more than you were in the "control" part of the test ....

      So if a lie is detected you could be
          a) lying
          b) think you are lying, but mistaken
          c) more stressed for other reasons

      and if a lie is not detected you could be
          a) telling the truth
          b) think you are telling the truth, but mistaken
          c) as stressed for other reasons as in the control
          d) no worried that you are lying, and so not stressed
          e) using one of the anti-lie detector methods that have been shown to work ...

      Note an operator has to be trained to use a polygraph because they have to use subjective assessment to avoid false positives and negatives: i.e. the testing is a subjective opionion

      Most studies of lie detectors are done by lie detector manufacturers, and surprisingly they all seem to come to the conclusion they are reliable and foolproof

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    2. Re:Same as always by thedonger · · Score: 1

      ...than pissing into a violin and expecting a concerto.

      I think Phillip Glass tried that...

      --
      Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
    3. Re:Same as always by Hoplite3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's also worth noting that the lie detector has been involved in securing many FALSE confessions. DNA evidence later exhonerates the poor soul, but the lie detector was an important part of convincing him to sign the confession.

      It's not just that the like detector is unscientific, it's that it is used to railroad people into confessing, rather than finding the truth.

      --
      Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
    4. Re:Same as always by TheSpoom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The DHS doesn't care. They just want a pseudoscience that can be used to detain people who don't do what they want.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    5. Re:Same as always by Walkingshark · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Well, you could be right. I have an idea, though.

      Lets test it! We'll use this lie detector method on congress, the supreme court, and the president. Any time they're acting in their official capacity, they have to wear the lie detector rig (or stand next to it if it is too big), and it'll have a big red light that lights up every time it detects a lie.

      If this thing is good enough to use in criminal cases, it is certainly good enough to use to help ensure that the electorate isn't being lied to, right?

      --
      The world you experience is only a close approximation of reality.
    6. Re:Same as always by Shark · · Score: 1

      I'd so mod you insightful. You summed it up brilliantly.

      --
      Mind the frickin' laser...
    7. Re:Same as always by geekoid · · Score: 1

      It has been shown that just strapped into a lie detector will cause some people to confess to a crime they didn't commit.

      People seem to forget the 'lie detector' was invented by a man with the kinky fetish of being tied up and force to talk.

      He also created wonder woman..who beats people up, then ties them up to make them talk.

      About your sig:
      I think the James Randi foundation is stopping the prize, and for very good reason.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Same as always by geekoid · · Score: 1

      So if a lie is detected you could be
              a) Interpreted incorrectly by the reader, who might as well be reading the bumps on your head.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Same as always by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the suspect thinks it works, it mgiht be useful for that reason alone.

      Police put the words "He's lying" in a copy machine, and stuck a colander with some wires on a suspect's head, and pressed the copy button whenever they thought he was lying - and got him to confess!

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  19. I can see it now ... by krou · · Score: 1

    [Prof. Farnsworth is searching for Terrorists with his Smelloscope]

    Leela: Anything yet, professor?

    Professor Hubert Farnsworth: I'm afraid the Smelloscope can't locate the terrorist. His fragrance is too mild. It's being overwhelmed by local sources.

    [Everyone looks at DHS Goon Zoidberg]

    DHS Goon Zoidberg: Hooray! Now I'm the center of attention.

    --
    'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
  20. so my govt pays for pseudoscience? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    what next, phrenology?

    phlogiston?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:so my govt pays for pseudoscience? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Our government has always paid for pseudoscience. See polygraph, particularly the section on reliability of such.

    2. Re:so my govt pays for pseudoscience? by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Divination, tarot, and astrology, of course. Though I've seen 'water witches' actually find water when I was a kid, be damned if I can figure out how they did it.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  21. B.O. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Barack Obama?

  22. The fart jokes with this are endless by mb10ofBATX · · Score: 1

    I find your lack of honesty disturbing

    You may be silent, but I can tell you're deadly

    Lawyer: And what tipped you off that there was indeed a body in the closet officer?
    Officer: The suspect farted.
    Lawyer: Excuse me? He farted?
    Officer: That's right - my fart analyzer detected an increase level of methane that led me to believe the suspect was hiding something.
    Defense: Could it have been that he was just wanting to hide that he was farting - not that he was guilty?
    Officer: If you were in that room, sir, you would have arrested him to. It was the least of things to be done.

  23. Oblig. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1)Commit horrendous crimes
    2)Start playing WoW
    3)????
    4)PROFIT

  24. C'mere DHS by DecimalThree · · Score: 1

    Pull my finger.

  25. Ut oh... by luciddr34m3r · · Score: 1

    I am so screwed.

  26. My creed by slackoon · · Score: 0

    1. This is my odor. There are many like it, but this one is mine. 2. My stench is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.

  27. DHS Emulates East Germany's Stasi by George+Maschke · · Score: 3, Informative

    As the co-founder of a website dedicated to exposing and ending waste, fraud, and abuse associated with supposed "lie detectors," I think this project stinks. It's redolent of the old East German secret police -- the Stasi -- who maintained a "smell register" of dissidents. For a short video commentary, see Smellograph.

    --

    George W. Maschke
    AntiPolygraph.org

    1. Re:DHS Emulates East Germany's Stasi by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

      Didn't they keep their "smell register" for use in tracking people with dogs, though?

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    2. Re:DHS Emulates East Germany's Stasi by George+Maschke · · Score: 1

      That was the idea. But it wasn't a particlarly good or useful one. If you look at the article in the original post, you'll see that a secondary aspect of the DHS study (beyond lie detection) is to try to identify "odor fingerprints" by which individuals can be identified.

      --

      George W. Maschke
      AntiPolygraph.org

    3. Re:DHS Emulates East Germany's Stasi by dargaud · · Score: 2, Informative

      the Stasi who maintained a "smell register" of dissidents

      It's visible in use in the excellent and highly recommended film The lives of others.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    4. Re:DHS Emulates East Germany's Stasi by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The movie "The international" shows where some of the East Germans ended up too.
      Not all of them are going door to door with junk mail or working in the private sector.
      Also never forget the CIA sat on a list of East German spies.
      "CIA hands over list of Stasi agents"
      http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/10/1057783288808.html
      Think of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Paperclip but with spies to watch over you.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:DHS Emulates East Germany's Stasi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DHS = Department of Homeland Security

      Now, let's throw some synonyms in. First of all, Homeland refers to the United States, so we can just call it "State". And a Department is basically a committee. So now you have:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_State_Security

  28. DHS should pay a visit to the US congress... by dogganos · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... There's the smell they are looking for.

  29. Gamers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    poor gamer's they will be always seen as liar's _

  30. Woot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    If the government can detect our lies I say it's only fair that we should have use of this tech. To detect theirs!

    If such a thing was allowed you can bet that Homeland Security would cut funding to this thing immediately and maybe even send the scientists to an undisclosed location.

  31. In the words of George Costanza... by Joe+Random · · Score: 1

    Jerry, just remember: It's not a lie if you believe it.

  32. All the more reason.. by drewvr6 · · Score: 1

    this proves we can't trust those Europeans!

    --
    Now we see the violence inherent in the system.
  33. My Creed by slackoon · · Score: 0

    1. This is my odor. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. My stench is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.

  34. A better way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a much easier way to tell if someone is a problem, other than testing their body odor.

    Gentlemen, let me introduce you to a little something I like to call "Phrenology"...

  35. Life imitating... er... life? by MrNemesis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is just precious - the Stasi in the GDR (east germany to most) did exactly the same thing with their suspects.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,484561,00.html
    http://scent-lab.blogspot.com/2008/07/body-odor-preserved-and-exhibited-at.html

    People being interrogated would frequently be asked to sit with their palms face down on a piece of cloth, usually stuck to the chair. After the interrogation, the cloth would be removed and placed in a jar for later analysis. I don't believe it's ever been admissible as evidence in any western court, but that's obviously what the whole DHS "proof" is all about.

    Quite why one would invest so many resources in this when fingerprints and DNA are already reliable forms of identification I don't know, and I strongly suspect that the "indicator" of deception will be flawed for much the same reasons the results of a polygraph are flawed - I can understand how someone who's stressed might well emit a different sort of sweat than someone who's just hot, but trying to define a "liars sweat" reeks (hohoho) of pseudoscience to me.

    Who knows, maybe there's something in it, maybe the article is making too much of things, maybe I've got my paranoid hat on. But it still seems worryingly like the whole "this man is the serial killer cos his writing is all weird" argument to me.

    --
    Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
    1. Re:Life imitating... er... life? by will_die · · Score: 1

      The Stasi did it for dog tracking. If you went on the run they had an sample stored in air tight jars that could be used by the dogs to hopfully track you.

    2. Re:Life imitating... er... life? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I think it's because if they can "reliably" tie odors to certain behaviours (lying, terrorism, viewing kiddie porn, whatever) then they can justify snooping *everyone* with the appropriate detector, be that technological or just a dog trained to look for certain odors. (But remember, a dog can look for multiple signatures at once, and can distinguish overlays, by the nature of their olfactory equipment.)

      However, as the article notes, what odor markers your body emits is greatly dependent on your diet and environment. That means it's inherently unreliable as an identity check -- unless you're a dog and can sort that all out without needing to be programmed for a new odor.

      It occurs to me that an "identity sample" taken at birth could retain sufficient odor factors for a dog to be able to tell if it's the same person a few decades later (given that a dog can sort out overlaying odors). The advantage over a DNA sample taken at birth is that an odor-marker sample could be ID'd on the spot by a good dog, no special equipment or laboratory time needed. I'm sure LE would love that -- an excuse to snoop everyone with an intimidating attack-trained sniffer dog, and it's not just for drugs anymore! Every totalitarian's wet dream......

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Life imitating... er... life? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      environment might be a key.
      Could old or new plastic explosive (or plastique) from Italy or the Soviet Union or Yugoslavia ect have soaked some neat long term unique tracer chemical into the skin?
      At the time it was just poor manufacturing, impurity or byproduct?
      Now its a spike on a graph.
      Lesson in this, never let your teachers travel, and the students stay clean until its time for 'change'

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Life imitating... er... life? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That's a good point. Grow and train your operatives in a "clean" environment, where they won't pick up contaminants... send the old people from "before the war" through to confuse the sensors with their embedded traces of antique incindiaries... Like any profiling system, it's easily gamed.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  36. Truth by bartoku · · Score: 4, Funny

    The new fragrance by Calvin Klein.

    1. Re:Truth by FrankDrebin · · Score: 1

      I'm sure "Truth" smells a lot better than the follow-on to "Obsession", "Rubberglovesession".

      --
      Anybody want a peanut?
  37. DHS has too much money by Intron · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they have enough money to do this project, why haven't we cut their budget yet?

    --
    Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    1. Re:DHS has too much money by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      If they have enough money to do this project, why haven't we cut their budget yet?

      Because government controls the masses, not the other way around.

    2. Re:DHS has too much money by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Becasue not enough people have expressed their outrage.
      Contact your Representative and tell them why homeland Security is a waste of money and adds no value to our protection.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:DHS has too much money by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      You don't believe the DHS should fund deception-related research?

    4. Re:DHS has too much money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5. Re:DHS has too much money by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      "Contact your Representative" would put you on the 'can think' list.
      "homeland Security" would put you on the person of interest list.
      If you then show up in protest surveillance or become to political in your local area, get ready for a lot of strange new coincidences.
      Learn to think like an East German, they are.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  38. Talk about racial profiling! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy mackeral! Talk about racial profiling!

  39. I know what this means by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    the French, Hatians, and Quebecois are all liars.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  40. Vegas? by MacColossus · · Score: 1

    They won't use this on flights back from Vegas. All the cheating husbands and wives that over gambled their nest egg and just got done lying to said spouse on the phone will gum up the system. "What happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas" has a whole new meaning when you aren't allowed to board your flight home.

  41. I don't like the smell of this by kpainter · · Score: 1

    Something just isn't right.

  42. The 'Staatssicherheitsdienst' did that before by trib3003 · · Score: 1
  43. When in doubt, copy hollywood by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    As if the "hit" Fox show Lie to Me weren't bad enough fiction, we're hit with this silly story. Lie detector tests are not always accurate and use much more elaborate measurements of the human body. What's next, the government is going to bring in Phil Helmuth to start reading criminals' tells?

    1. Re:When in doubt, copy hollywood by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Lie detector tests are not EVER accurate..."

      Bold portion changed by me.

      I could roll three dice to see is someone is lying, and even then sometime I will be rights. More often if I use a subjective criteria like lie detector interpreters do.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:When in doubt, copy hollywood by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      That's simply not true. There's a science behind lie detector tests based in human psychology AND physiology. You can't make determinations with just one (that's why the body odor test is not valid), you need to analyze physiological responses as framed by the psychology of the questions posed.

  44. We aleady have that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    We already can tell when someone from the government is lying.

    Their lips are moving.

  45. Lies by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    to determine if a deception indicator can be found.

          The only lie is the headline.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Lies by Spatial · · Score: 1

      Smell detected: bullshit

  46. I suppose it's one step up from goat's entrails by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    All these things do is detect agitation, arousal, stress, illness, ambient climate, backache, annoyance and occasionally lies.

    Any of these external factors could be caused by any number of reasons - most of which are present in spades at an airport. Maybe the first place to use them would be on the contractors who will make the money from selling this turkey to the government:

    Question: "does it work?"

    Detected answer: "no of course not"

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:I suppose it's one step up from goat's entrails by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Logic fail. If it didn't work, they wouldn't get the right answer. ;)

      Kind of like evaluating "This statement is false."

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  47. Looking for indicators by McGregorMortis · · Score: 1

    research it hopes to fund "will consist primarily of the analysis and study of the human odor samples collected to determine if a deception indicator can be found."

    I think it's pretty certain that such indicators will be found, at least initially. They probably don't exist, or if they do, they probably will be about as reliable as today's polygraphs (ie, not at all). But they will be found nevertheless, for the simple reason that no indicators means no more money.

  48. Ways to Beat this by Theoboley · · Score: 1

    Wear Deodorant.

    --
    Stupidity only gets you so far, then you've gotta try
  49. was the very earliest stage of technological devel by rhendershot · · Score: 1

    >"Proof of Concept"...was the very earliest stage of technological development

    so I read that as saying it's been proposed.

    And they would really really like to have some .gov pay for it all, but... no promises on results!

    sheesh.

  50. Well ... by Cuppa+'Joe'+Black · · Score: 1

    Well this doesn't pass the sniff test ... Oh wait ...

    --
    Technically, murder-suicide does not violate the golden rule.
  51. soap on just enough rope to hang him by Spacepup · · Score: 1

    This wont work...terrorists obviously don't bathe and are allergic to soap. Sheesh, don't any of those DHS people read the news?

  52. outgoing administration must be funky as heck by wardk · · Score: 1

    my goodness, if lies = stink, I suspect the Obama's needed some air fresheners to even set foot in the white house.

    1. Re:outgoing administration must be funky as heck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TROLL!!! lol

  53. In this economy? by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    Paying geeks money to test smells is not going to help stimulate the economy.

  54. This Ali guy... by jplopez · · Score: 1

    Smells like yihad spirit.

  55. I can see it now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a policeman interrogating a criminal and saying "Your so full of shit I can smell you."

  56. Oh Bugger, thats the end of /. then by Barsteward · · Score: 2, Funny

    everyone will be found to be lying....

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  57. So all have to do by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    is invent/patent a cologne/perfume that smells like a lie and poof profit?????????

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:So all have to do by Blig · · Score: 1

      is invent/patent a cologne/perfume that smells like a lie and poof profit?????????

      No, you invent one that smells like the truth. Much bigger profit then. Especially from politicians. ;-)

  58. Not necessarily. by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

    They could also be typing or writing, or in some instances nodding.

  59. Smells like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...bulshit to me! :)

  60. That Explains It by kbielefe · · Score: 1

    At least now we know why people will believe anything they read on the internet---they can't smell the author.

    There really is a feeding frenzy going on at the government trough right now, isn't there? If "that smells suspicious" made the cut, what other figures of speech can we get paid to test? I think I'll see if I can get paid to study why feet smell and noses run. Or the scientific difference between shutting up and quieting down.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank.
  61. Lies, Damned Lies and DHS "Science" by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

    DHS has announced several studies attempting to serve as lie detection. All of the others had a fatal flaw, as does this one. A major problem is that they detect physiological changes or signals but can't determine the reason. A person nervous about flying will respond to this measure the same as a person planning to blow it up. Another problem is that this measure requires 15 to 60 seconds for the body to react maximally. The amount of time being interrogated will build up to the point that most anyone would get annoyed, something else they can't differentiate. There's also the problem of overlap of the effect of sequential questions and the cognitive/emotional reaction to them. Two control questions in a row makes a person wonder "what are they getting at?" and that causes the same physiological reaction as the other causes.

    DHS has no intention of wasting the money on real devices for this and the other measures. They know full well they won't work. They also know full well that the vast majority of people don't know these things wouldn't work. These press releases about lie detection devices are pure propoganda. DHS has become a junior Ministry of Truth in an attempt to remain viable. It has already failed in most of its mission, and anything that's not yet a failure gives them reason to continue working and absorbing funding. Psyops seems to be the only thing it's capable of.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    1. Re:Lies, Damned Lies and DHS "Science" by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Of course they know it won't work. But this project serves a multitude of purposes, much like DHS itself. First off, it makes it look like the government is doing something, much like TSA. Second, it puts paychecks into a couple of people's pockets, much like TSA, which can be considered good for the economy. Third, while it doesn't help, it has the appearance of not hurting either. Lastly, but not least, it puts money in the hands of some corporado for beer & pretzels, always a good thing...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  62. Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A good majority of America will be labeled terrorists.

  63. That passenger behind you might not be lying.... by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    ...be he sure as hell reeks too badly to be allowed on the plane.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  64. Note to self by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bathe and use a lot of deodorant before that next flight.

  65. Smeel Thees by TrentTheThief · · Score: 1

    Ha! I fart in your general direction!

    1. Re:Smeel Thees by Theoboley · · Score: 1

      I thumb my nose at you and your KNNNNNNNNIGGGGITS

      --
      Stupidity only gets you so far, then you've gotta try
  66. Das Ministerium für Heimatsstaatssicherheit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since DHS is modeling itself on the Stasi, maybe they could come up with a cuter name like Dehose. It brings to mind the lovely image of being castrated by ghetto sluts.

  67. I don't think this idea by Phoenix666 · · Score: 1

    passes the sniff test.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
  68. medical conditions anyone? by joneil · · Score: 1

    I have a real body odour problem due to a medical condition. It is not uncommon for me to take a shower twice a day even. It's a chronic, "incurable" condition I have had since childhood. Yes, you can all jump in here and insert "boy you stink " jokes. I think I've heard them all, but I'm always up for new material. :) Back to the point, what am I supposed to do now - carry around a letter form my doctor or wear a medi-alert bracelet that states I have a medical condition that affect body odour and no, I'm not a terrorist just because I don't smell right? I wonder if situation like mine are being addressed with this "new" technology, or if people are even aware of the potential issue to begin with? Or do they even care?

  69. To paraphrase Buckaroo Banzai: by ClosedSource · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can check your anatomy all you want, and even though there may be normal variation, when it comes right down to it, this far inside pseudoscience it all looks the same.

  70. At long last... by memorycardfull · · Score: 1

    We might have a non-invasive method to tell if the guy you are torturing is just making stuff up to get you to stop torturing him.

  71. Bad move... by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

    Time to wash, boys!

    I don't care if they stink or not, but rubbing soap on the DHS folks is unlikely to speed your passage through security...

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  72. Stress analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they detect if a person is under stress. So the psychopaths, who do not suffer from stress the same way as a normal person get off free. Aldrich Aimes passed his lie detector tests, how much more proof do people need that stress analysis is a bit pointless.

  73. smells like old socks by juan2074 · · Score: 1

    You mean all those stinky people at the gym are lying?

    I knew that guy wasn't really bench-pressing 300 lbs.

  74. Fox's newest TV show by jeko · · Score: 1

    Next week, in a dramatic new spin-off from "Lie To Me," the premiere of "Sniff Me," starring the Ghost of Abe Vigoda.

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  75. Something about this smells funny... by itsybitsy · · Score: 1

    that's all I got... the subject is the punch line... ;-)

  76. Dogs by Joebert · · Score: 1

    It could explain why some dogs bite shady acting people.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  77. Reduce / Ged Rid Of Your Body Odor by mrs+clear+plastic · · Score: 1

    Here is how I reduced my body odor to the point that I don't even use deoderant anymore:

    1. Stop eating refined sugar. I mean anything with refined sugar. No more donuts, cookied, cakes, ice cream, etc.

    2. Stop, and I mean really stop eating/drinking anything with high fructose corn syrup. Yes. That means no more soda. No more fake juices. No more candy. No more so called energy bars. This means religiously looking at labels.

    3. Cut out red meats. I mean all of them. If you must eat meat, limit yourself to white meat and fish.

    4. Get out and exercise.

    5. Make your own juices. Get a juicer. Juice fresh organic vegitables and fruits. I mean everything from wheatgrass, spinach, celery, carrots (lots of those), beats (lots of those also). Oranges (the whole thing; don't skin or peal them).

    I started this ragime in April, 2008 and now I have lost over 40 pounds and have noticed s very significent drop in body odor. I can go weeks without deoderant. Sure, I still shower, but I don't do through a stick every two weeks. I still have
    the same stick that I had March of 2008.

    Under this ragime, I am about 95 percent vegitarian and about 85 percent vegan.

    And I have lost at least 90 percent of my body odor. I also look and feel younger.

    I think that this ragime, I would have no problems with homeland security and airports.

    Luv

    Cleara

    --
    Cleara
  78. You know what they say... by sethmeisterg · · Score: 1

    Cleanliness is next to Truthiness.

  79. The East Germans did this... by docwatson223 · · Score: 1

    Are they now going to get the trainers for the armpit dogs from the old DDR? WTF?

  80. Insane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll just determine whether you lied about taking a shower.

  81. This is it. by James+Skarzinskas · · Score: 0

    Welp, the DHS has it right. I always knew Slashdotters were full of shit; now I can pin it on the smell and call it a day.

  82. Oh no... by flinkflonk · · Score: 1

    I'm sweating already