Slashdot Mirror
European Researchers Develop More Accurate Full-Body Polygraph
jfruh writes: Despite their widespread use in industry and law enforcement, traditional lie-detector polygraphs give accurate results only about 60% of the time, barely better than the 55% accuracy people can get just by following their gut instincts. Now researchers in the UK and the Netherlands are trying to improve that. They claim a full-body polygraph based on motion-capture suits used for movie special effects can detect lies with 75% accuracy.
75% of the time, it works all of the time!
just add full body motion to the list of do's and don'ts when you're taking the test. ever notice how often joe biden scratches his nose when he's talking out of his ass? yea, that's called a tell. i remember hearing about an indiana guy that was arrested for training people to beat polygraphs.
I have a dowsing rod with better accuracy. My coin flip is 50% accurate. But lets convince everyone here that our standards for the truth are low enough to buy a bunch of polygraph apparatus that is 75% accurate, because technology is just not good enough to get to the truth. The truth is, this is totally stupid.
Now we need to make it compulsory for all politicians to use these when discussing their political manifestos to get in power...
...and stressful enough already. Now they'll tell you to strip and get into a silly motion capture suit. Next up is sticking a probe up our anus to measure the contraction of the sphincter muscles. After all, it's for our own good. How else will our overlords prevent another Snowden fiasco?
Stephen Hawking for all the things he did!
If the makers are claiming 75% and nobody is trained against these kinds of polygraphs, they probably won't be a bit different in the real world any further than 5 years from now.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I wonder why they don't use MRI or some other brain activity visualization technique; Recalling memory and forging a new story must be more distinguishable there than on body movements.
Brain fingerprinting seems to be quit a bit better at detecting whether a person has knowledge of a crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
Tea leaves?
Instead broadening the area of interest, why not focus on where lies are actually formed, i.e. the brain? Put more effort in understanding the brain and on finding a way to detect changes to the brain when someone lies.
Don't fornicate. Seriously, just don't do it.
There are so many different types of lies, and so many different liars, I need some kind of control group to have confidence they don't just catch the ones who wet their pants (the 55% test). The worst ones I encounter are so goddam sure of themselves within minutes that I believe they could pass any garment.
Gently reply
Even worse, they don't give the failure rate in a useful manner. 100% for pass (zero false negatives) and 0% for fail (100% of fails reported as a false positive) is easy. You just say "he passed" no matter what the results are. Or the reverse as well. But "75% accurate" is mostly meaningless.
Learn to love Alaska
"Despite their widespread use in industry and law enforcement, traditional lie-detector polygraphs give accurate results only about 60% of the time"
There is no verifiable scientific evidence that polygraphs actually work.
They tested this on 75 volunteers. This is an example of the kind of bogus "proof" that is used to justify the utility of polygraphs in the first place.
It's in the same territory as drug companies excluding tests that show problems with their drugs. I'm sure if they ran enough small groups that they could find one with better then 90% and report only that.
Why do polygraph advocates lie so much?
Why is Snark Required?
Actually, for most definitions of HR, it doesn't matter what they think about polygraph tests. In most cases, they aren't allowed to ask you to take one, and you can pretty much always refuse if they do.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
In other news, the same research group has improved the accuracy of entrail reading by including other internal organs, doubled the accuracy of palm reading by using both hands, and are now hard at work devising ever-larger crystal balls in the hopes of refining their accuracy beyond "total bullshit."
Liberty in your lifetime
File it with "Scientology bunkum".
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
polygraph exams are designed not so much to stress you but to trip you up with a series of simple yes/no questions then all of a sudden, they hit you with one so loaded you can't answer it without incriminating yourself - but you HAVE to answer it to conform to the test conditions!
When I say "loaded", I mean something like:
"Have you stopped fucking your neighbour's dog?"
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
I don't believe them.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Ironically, the claim that it is possible to detect lies has always been a con. Polygraph detectors are made by con artists.
They can detect nervousness, nothing more. And of course if you lie to people that you can detect lies, that will make it a self fulfilling prophesy to the less intelligent.
Of course a normal level of neurosis and intelligence will make you nervous when they as you an incriminating question. But since when did authorities care what happens to intelligent people rather than to gullible employees or controllable masses?
I would also like to know if there is really a "widespread use" of polygraphs. I understood they were almost exclusively used in the US, and that most other countries actually forbade its use as evidence in courts - which would make the use of polygraph a local idiosyncracy rather than a widespread practice.
This device is still flawed: it measure nervousness, which means that any psychopath will pass the test without any problem. It also means that people who get emotional easily will fail even if they tell the truth.
IOW: garbage.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
I would also like to know if there is really a "widespread use" of polygraphs. I understood they were almost exclusively used in the US, and that most other countries actually forbade its use as evidence in courts - which would make the use of polygraph a local idiosyncracy rather than a widespread practice.
I think even in the US they are not allowed as evidence. They are used as interogation, but yes, I have never heard of any use outside of the US, at least they fell out of favor around the same time as phrenology.
The blind earth bender Toph is the best lie detector on record. She detects the tiniest of the vibrations on earth and uses it to detect lies, even though she is totally blind. Her earth bending skills are so good she can fight many fire and water benders without even seeing them. But, despite all that, despite becoming the earth bending guru to Aang, she was fooled by the Fire nation circus performers. Shows there is no way to reliably detect a lie.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Well, did you?
Cheap storage VM.
Polygraphs are voodoo.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
All you really need to know is the claim that it "can detect lies with 75% accuracy."
Nope; sorry, that's just *not* what polygraphs do; conflating "is stressed" or "showing a marked difference in measured body responses" with "is lying" is exactly the problem, no matter how accurate are the sensors.
Everyone should read (it's free!) The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. Subtract agenda as necessary, but don't ignore the meat of it: https://antipolygraph.org/lie-...
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5