48 pointsby grubbs3 hours ago9 comments
  • shevy-java2 minutes ago
    > countermeasures such as butt-clenching

    Ehm ...

    I am actually not that convinced of that, largely because e. g. the KGB operated quite differently. And it seems very strange to me that the CIA would train an army of wanna-be's as ... butt-clenching recruits. The more sensible option is to have a poker face; and totally believe in any lie no matter how and what. That's kind of what Sergey Lavrov does. He babbles about how Ukraine invaded Russia. Kind of similar to a certain guy with a moustache claiming Poland invaded Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident).

  • ifh-hn18 minutes ago
    I've no idea why I read to the end of that, seems like a long ramble, I kept expecting something to happen and it never did.
    • alansaber7 minutes ago
      This was how I felt about reading War and Peace
  • nubg3 minutes ago
    Comments by stego-tech and zenon_paradox are AI bot slop. This site is being absolutely swarmed by them lately.
  • FergusArgyll14 minutes ago
    I don't get it, I thought it's settled science that polygraphs don't work. Why are these agencies still using them?
    • sonofhans6 minutes ago
      They do work. Their purpose is intimidation. They’re not truth machines, they’re pressure cookers.
  • zenon_paradox2 hours ago
    The most troubling aspect of these accounts is the "unfalsifiable" nature of the countermeasure accusation. Once an examiner decides you’re manipulating your physiological response, there is no empirical way to prove you weren't. It essentially turns a high-stakes job interview into a test of how well you can suppress natural stress reactions. It’s a shame to see how many talented individuals are sidelined by a process that prizes a specific physiological profile over a demonstrated record of integrity.
  • mzajc31 minutes ago
    (2018)
  • stego-tech22 minutes ago
    Adding my POV from a former National Security perspective:

    Author is 100% on point. The point of a polygraph is three-fold: weeding out the dipshits; exerting power over the powerless; and identifying the valuable assets (typically sociopaths). It does not - cannot - identify liars, deceit, or bad actors on its face (that comes from the manual the author linked). It's not scientific assessment, it's psychological torture.

    Would I take a polygraph to reactivate my clearance? Yeah, if I had to. Would I pass? That's up to the examiner, because much like the author I won't tolerate being called a liar, nor will I capitulate to power games. I'll be honest, forthcoming, and cooperative - and if that's not enough to pass, then I don't want to work for you.

    • rconti6 minutes ago
      This was all so weird to read about. I guess I just assumed the polygraph was of marginal utility, and you either passed, or you didn't. I didn't realize it was part of a combative interrogation process, even for regular employees.
  • Paracompact35 minutes ago
    Am I a bad person if the picture of someone in the CIA crying is funny to me? Not out of malice or anything. It's just something I didn't know they did.

    Do they also have little "Hang in there!" posters on the wall, too?

    • eru26 minutes ago
      It's a bureaucracy like any other.
    • SpaceL10n15 minutes ago
      I would use this information to reflect.
    • airstrike20 minutes ago
      Not a bad person, just lacking in wisdom.
    • stego-tech26 minutes ago
      Not bad, just as misinformed as most folks out there about the process and requirements.

      National Security is a PITA, full of cutthroat sociopaths who would eat the SV VC-types for breakfast. That is a compliment, because the work they do is broadly dark and grimly necessary, at least at the levels of global geopolitics a lot of them are expected to operate at. I washed out in contracting for much the same reason this person kept "failing" polygraphs: honesty to the point of external perceptions of naivety. The types who excel in these sectors see folks like us as doormats or tissues, and react poorly when we catch them in the act and demand anything resembling respect because they know we're a threat to the entire establishment if we're allowed to succeed.

      The point of polygraphs has always been about control, and folks who resist that sort of control are incidentally highlighting themselves as being uncontrollable to power alone. The books the author links are excellent starting points for understanding the true function of a polygraph, and why more places are outlawing them as a means of trying to diversify a deeply broken and hostile security apparatus by preventing it from being a "blind fools and sociopaths-only" club.