News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Lie Behind the Lie Detector by kevin_thibedeau on Monday November 12, 2018 @01:36PM (#18434560)
They use it to ferret out untrustworthy people at government contractors. This catches some moles.

The real problem is when this hocus pocus enters the legal system and people get convicted based on examiner testimony or face the presumed guilt applied to anyone who refuses a polygraph.

Re:The Lie Behind the Lie Detector by ap_org on Monday November 12, 2018 @01:39PM (#18434580)
There is no documented example of the polygraph ever catching a mole. On the contrary, all of the known moles who were subjected to polygraph screening beat the polygraph.
Re:The Lie Behind the Lie Detector by zaroth on Monday November 12, 2018 @03:31PM (#18435461)
Saying that they "beat" the test gives the test too much credence. The test is a ploy to make the subject confess. The only step to beating the test, is the simple knowledge that it's a ploy in the first place.
Re:The Lie Behind the Lie Detector by ap_org on Monday November 12, 2018 @03:51PM (#18435665)
Point well taken. But the U.S. government does consider the polygraph to be a pass/fail procedure. Applicants and employees suffer severe career harm for "failing."
Re:The Lie Behind the Lie Detector by masonic on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @12:54AM (#18447823)
Wasn't Philby caught by polygraph but argued his way out of the results? (He was, in fact, a spy all along).
Re:The Lie Behind the Lie Detector by ap_org on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @02:56AM (#18448290)
No, Philby was not "caught by polygraph."