http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../06/wlie06.xml
I think any potential terrorists will be very happy with this measure. It virtually guarantees that they'll not be discovered.Millions of airline passengers travelling through Russia will soon have to take a lie detector test as part of new security measures.
30 seconds to a minute! If the suspect passes the test will they be given the all clear? If not, what the point of it?The machine asks four questions. The first is for full identity, while the second, unnerving in its Soviet-style abruptness, demands: "Have you ever lied to the authorities?" It then asks if the passenger is carrying weapons or narcotics.
To cut delays to a minimum, passengers will take the test after putting their shoes and baggage through the X-ray machines and before retrieving them. Officials insist that it will take between 30 seconds and a minute.
People who don't realise that 'lie detectors' don't really work may be intimidated by them but a terrorist organisation will educate its members on how to pass the 30-60 second interogation.
Why do governments still embrace this pseudoscience? Our government were planning on using the polygraph to monitor sex offenders. The consequences of false negative results are all too clear. :-\
.
I guess that authoritarian regimes desperately want to know what is going on inside peoples' heads - and from there it only takes a little bit of wishful thinking to persuade themselves that polygraphs (the name "lie detector" is itself a lie, of course) really allow them to do this.
The alternative explanation is a political one - the authorities know that the machines are useless, but they hope that the general public don't know this. Many people may be impressed at the 'high tech security' being used to protect them, will therefore feel safer and will give political credit for this illusion of safety to the authorities.
I considered this angle when I was looking into their use with paedophiles: that the government were considering using them as a public confidence measure.Originally Posted by Jocky
The problem of course is that they would create a false sense of security and if a child was abused by a paedophile after 'passing' a polygraph test then it would blow up in the government's face.
Pilot studies in the USA showed that when paedophiles were initially given lie detector tests they confessed to many cases that had remained unsolved which gave the illusion that their use was warranted.
I suspect that this was what David Blunkett found so appealing about them. The real concern however, is their efficacy with long-term use. Once paedophiles learn how to fool the polygraph their use would actually assist paedophiles escape detection.
.
Absolutely - as a long-term strategy using polygraphs for this reason would be disastrous. And it's probably even more disastrous for terrorists than paedophiles, because terrorists are more organised and dedicated - so they're likely to work out how to beat it and then put this knowledge into practice with greater speed and success.
But surely a politician would never be guilty of short-termism - Heaven Forfend
Actually I think that simple ignorance is the more likely explanation. Best solution would be to put a few politicians through polygraph tests themselves. As expert professional liars they would beat it easily, and then they would realise how useless it was!
A little pendant to the discussion:
http://theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2006-02-16a.49975.h
The government has been considering using Voice Stress Analysis on social security claimants since late 2004 at least, although the matter has not had much media attention. Naturally, if it is introduced, claimants themselves will not be able to mount much resistance.
It is prudent, I think, to watch how a state treats its least regarded citizens: it tells us how they would like to treat the rest of us. Of course, VSA ought to be attacked anyway as mendacious claptrap, but trying to protect the weak gives an extra incentive.
I read an article some months ago, about a technique that is being developed which monitors brain activity. Specifically memory access. The claim went something along the lines of:
It can be determined absolutely wether or not you are telling the truth by the type of memory access invoked when you are asked a question. If you have no knowledge of the subject matter, then no memory access of the type being observed will take place.
I'll see if I can find the link to the artcile.
Yes, I've seen this too.
IIRC the research is going on in the USA and the basic premise is that we can recall information much quicker than we can make something up (lie).
It actually looks promising as it should be a lot more accurate than the polygraph. It's still being developed though and there may be problems with it that they don't yet know about.
I suspect that it can be fooled in a similar way that a polygraph can - by recognising the control questions and giving false feedback.
.
I'll see if I can type better and use the spell checker too... :)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks