21 ms·

Personal Statement of a CIA Analyst

245 points by giles_corey 8y ago

ilaksh 8y ago
I had a contract doing a WebGL 3D space sim and graphing thing for a guy who was then going to recruit me to apply the technology for military applications. They wanted a browser-based simulator. But he told me that the application process in order to get clearance would involve a nasty investigation questioning everyone who knew me about all kinds of personal things. It seemed like a fun project that would pay decently, but it didn't make sense for me to subject myself to some kind of intense invasion of privacy or interrogation. The other part of it is that the software was going to be used for warfare planning. And I consider war to be unethical profiteering. In my opinion things like polygraphs and invasive investigations AND most things related to war and spying belong in movies rather than a sane and ethical world.
- PaulRobinson 8y ago
  I get why people think they should/could object to war and think choosing projects is enough. If you work on OSS, you're contributing to the military industrial complex indirectly. If you pay your taxes, yes, you pay for schools, but you're also paying for an intelligence system and armed contingent within your country. Most HNers are contributing to NATO. The Internet started life as a DARPA project in order to coordinate response after nuclear war. Be a conscientious objector if you wish, just don't build stuff on the Internet and complain about how evil all things related to defence are. And I'd be fascinated to know what forms of profiteering you consider ethical.
  - ianai 8y ago
    I think of it differently. The economy really doesn’t need to employ everyone who needs work and money. Government could diminish this discrepancy any number ways. For one, they could establish stipends to help people achieve their basic needs. Or they could create public works projects or just government projects to ensure full employment with suitable accommodations for people’s varied needs. I look at defense spending as essentially this. Yes, the US has a huge defense department. Yes that means the US has the most might of any country. That even leads it to things like excesses. But it’s fundamentally the only version of my previous statement the political climate digests. If you want otherwise and are a US citizen then get involved in your civil duties.
  - skybrian 8y ago
    I agree that open source code can be used for purposes you don't like. By using an open source license, you give up control. (But should you retain that sort of control over everything you do? I'm unconvinced.) I don't believe that ethical thinking has to be all or nothing. Not taking some projects makes them a bit harder and more expensive to recruit for and helps you sleep better at night, if that's the sort of thing that bothers you. Not paying your taxes is something you can go to jail for, which seems like a bad trade.
- phyller 8y ago
  > And I consider war to be unethical profiteering Do you mean all war? Or something more limited, like conflicts involving the US over the past 20 years. Or, only for the initiators of conflict. I find that line of thinking hard to justify after the most basic application to actual historical events. Like when Finland was defending itself against Russia, was Finland attempting unethical profiteering? What should they have done instead?
  - adventured 8y ago
    There are plenty of examples of ethical foreign military actions as well. The US stopping genocide in Europe with the Kosovo war, for example, was ethical. If a people or nation can't defend itself from an aggressor (eg the UNC & South Korea vs China & North Korea), it's more than reasonable that a stronger power step in to help with that defense if it's willing to do so. The first Gulf War was also an ethical intervention of 30 nations vs Iraq, to push them back out of Kuwait.
    - ekianjo 8y ago
      The problem is that its inconsistent. For every ethical action out there how many dozens of other wars are completely ignored by the same powers? That is what makes the ethical stance highly doubtful.
      - phyller 8y ago
        Not sure I follow your logic. So if the US doesn't intervene to stop genocide in the Sudan, it is unethical for them to stop genocide anywhere else? If the US was to get involved in a war every time they thought something unethical was happening would that be good? If the US made a policy to never intervene anywhere, even if trivial intervention could improve the lives of millions, would that be good? I find that people have strong opinions about war and are happy to share them, but often don't seem to have thought them through at all. Why should either war everywhere or war nowhere make sense? Is there any room for good judgment, to weigh ethics, ability and consequences, and have a different approach in different situations? There is an entire field of philosophy and ethics around this that has been developed in the Western world and continues to be researched and debated, called just warfare. It is actually used, at least in the US, to inform decisions about rules of engagement and legal or illegal tools and tactics. In fact it is required learning for future officers in the US military, at least in the Air Force.
csense 8y ago
If they know polygraph doesn't work, why do they still do it?
- lalaland1125 8y ago
  It does somewhat work in the same way that homeopathy somewhat works. The placebo effect of convincing people that it works produces some results on naive people. Not to mention that eliminating the polygraph would require someone to admit that they were wrong about using a polygraph.
- JohnStrangeII 8y ago
  From what I've read about it, it works to some extent as long as people believe in it. They want to get their clearance and believe cheating could be detected, so they tend to be more truthful. It's based on intimidation and observation. The examination starts when you enter the building and stops when you leave it.
  - dev_dull 8y ago
    Something that tells the truth inconsistently and nondeterministically sounds worse for our society than just asking the question under oath.
    - droithomme 8y ago
      It's not inconsistent though. It's never caught a single spy. So it's got a 100% false negative rate. That's very consistent and reliable.
- Theodores 8y ago
  Because belief is not rational. The people that passed the polygraph tests and administer them to others may acknowledge the flaws but they still 'know' that a lie detector is the best they have got. They also know that some people will just confess at the thought of being wired up to such a machine, to give evidence that, unlike the lie detector, is admissible in court. The most interesting story is how the authorities nabbed the guy who was most dedicated to dismissing the lie-detector baloney: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/12/polygraph-critic-trial-lie-busters-doug-williams https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/12/polygraph-cr... His consulting work of helping people pass lie detectors was his downfall. Had he just stuck to campaigning against the lie detector and not wanting to offer services to those needing to pass a lie detector test then all would have been okay for him and he would not be having to serve one of those silly 100 year sentences that American justice demands.
YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
>> To prepare for the test, I read A Tremor in the Blood by David T. Lykken. The book described the use of control versus relevant questions as well as countermeasure such as butt-clenching. This explains that other thing I read yesterday, in a different article about the polygraph test: "There may be something that's put on the tip of the finger that records blood flow and we also use something called a movement detector which is on the seat and picks up if you're trying to beat the test," Prof Grubin explains. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45736631 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45736631 So that's not a "movement detector". It's a butt-clench detector. That's just the level of seriousness I'd expect from modern-day sorcery with wires and computers, instead of fetishes and incantations.
- cryoshon 8y ago
  not to mention that butt-clenching is just the simplest way of nonvisibly messing with your vital signs. a guy walking in off the street can butt clench. once you get into some of the intermediate level buddhist body awareness studies, you won't need the butt clench to cause your muscle tenor, heart rate, body temp, and respiration to respond to your will.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
polythrowaway 8y ago
I was a team leader at a USSOCOM unit and had to take a poly to be read into a couple of three-letter agency programs. In the middle of the test, the smug 23 year old fresh college grad administering the thing tells me I'm being deceptive and obviously support jihadi terrorism. This as I'm getting ready to leave on my 12th deployment. I've never wanted to so violently break someone's face as right then in that moment.
- kungtotte 8y ago
  I'm picturing that scene from The Rock where Ed Harris chews out that young staffer who questions him.
  - phyller 8y ago
    If that statement was actually part of the test, that poor guy had a very dangerous job. "Might as well put the new guys in there, if they get killed we don't lose someone more valuable."
- poly2throwaway 8y ago
  When administering the test some examiners will tell the subject they failed just to see the reaction or if they will admit to something. All though, it would be a poor choice to do this to someone who had taken multiple screening polys.
- crististm 8y ago
  I hate it when people do this. What's the better comeback/reaction to this frame? (apparently, my verbalized fuck-off, tamed or not, is not the best approach)
  - craftyguy 8y ago
    "I'm sorry, that's not true.", then wait for them to continue the test?
    - 8y ago
viraptor 8y ago
> That rules out entire professions: ... and Pharmacy. Pharmacy in the is requires a polygraph? I didn't expect that. It's not required in other Commonwealth countries as far as I know.
- ap_org 8y ago
  In the United States, the Employee Polygraph Protection act includes blanket exemptions for federal, state, and local governmental agencies, as well as exemptions for security services (such as guards who transport cash) and for those who handle or transport drugs.
  - MrMorden 8y ago
    And many states prohibit polygraphs for all private-sector employers.
- fphhotchips 8y ago
  The USA is not a Commonwealth country - they formally lost that membership when they declared independence (and informally when they dumped a shipment of tea into a harbour).
  - codingdave 8y ago
    If you are going to get specific about history like that, then we formally lost that membership with the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Revolutionary War, not the Declaration of Independence, which formalized why we started fighting it.
- walshemj 8y ago
  That's because mi5 and 6 in the 50' thought it was a load of hokum and had a lot of influence with the commonwealth nations.
everdrive 8y ago
"I was surprised. It's an important book about her field, I would have thought all polygraphers knew of it." Unsurprisingly, these guys tend to have a lot of turn-around, and are not necessarily spending time researching their craft.
kodablah 8y ago
Maybe it is how it's written, but this person's entire career reads like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors. Even though they say the job is among the happiest times of their life, it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have, especially in the public sector. I'd have given the middle finger right away knowing I can find enjoyable work sans harassment. To put it crudely, I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles. Instead of telling your kids to avoid working at places with a polygraph, how about instilling some confidence and make it clear to them that if they are/become really good at what they do, they have the leverage to not put up with these things (at least in non-depressed employment markets).
- icebraining 8y ago
  How does "leverage" get you a job in Intelligence without passing a poly?
  - joncrane 8y ago
    The leverage is the ability to make the same amount of money in a non-cleared role.
  - grkvlt 8y ago
    By leveraging the fact that one is a UK citizen, and applying to SIS or GCHQ, I assume? Most other countries perform in-depth background checks, rather than relying on pseudo-science, when it comes to matters of national security.
    - ganoushoreilly 8y ago
      The background investigations are still performed, the poly is an additional layer added on, so that's the only real formal difference between countries.
      - MrMorden 8y ago
        I really want to believe that polygraphs are just used as an interrogation tool and not as a substitute for the SSBI. But the FBI gave Nada Nadim Prouty an SCI clearance even though she wasn't even lawfully present in the US, let alone a citizen. She was working for CIA when the next investigation was due, and they didn't have a problem either.
polyfolly 8y ago
Throw away account. I get one every 5 years for my clearances. After having several, I view it as just another BS hoop to jump. Obviously it does not work as a lie detector, but it’s an excellent tool for interrogation. At least that’s my conclusion. Just answer yes and no. They’ll say you are almost done, but have an issue with one question, and want you to explain more. Don’t explain anything; just say “I don’t know“ and you are answering truthfully. Just stay relaxed, calm, and bored.
- throwawaypolly 8y ago
  Throwaway as well. FWIW I would estimate that 85% of my colleagues that discuss their poly experience view it as the same. It is an interrogation prop masquerading as science. The poly is subjective, as evident by the few times I have failed, re-tested, and passed. If I were lying the first time and did not change any answers, how can I pass the second time? The author alluded to it in her writing, but all of the test administrators have read up on methods of defeating the polygraph exam. Often, the "I've never heard of it" line is a lie.
  - polyfolly 8y ago
    Now that I think about it, it probably is useful for initial job screening. More like a psychological test to screen out those that get too riled up over stuff. Though that really has more to do with age. The first one I had took three hours. Years later, the recent one was 1 hour. The one thing the intel community does want to screen out are rash decision makers. So it’s probably excellent measure of one’s ability to keep cool under pressure.
    - Waterluvian 8y ago
      It would help me screen out jobs I don't want. Would never want to work somewhere that sees employees that way.
    - jancsika 8y ago
      > More like a psychological test to screen out those that get too riled up over stuff. If that's is the case, then a nasty side-effect is to weed out the people who as a general principle refuse to put up with abuse as a basic condition of their potential job. Maybe a small deal if you're only hiring James Bond-style spies, but a big deal if you're mainly hiring analysts. Imagine in a FLOSS project that I force all pull-request makers to read through my recursive, non-deterministic set of makefiles and fix a bug there. How many high-quality pull requests will I accept under such a system vs. simply assessing pull requests on their merit? Of course that's not a fair comparison. I apologize to polygraph operators for it. :)
irundebian 8y ago
A little bit unrelated: Are they any credible resources which give insights on how it is like to work for these three letter agencies?
- nyolfen 8y ago
  they're a bit dated but you should check out phil agee's books. his first one in particular was very scandalous.
YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
>> The examiner came back. "You're having a problem with one of the questions. Do you know which one?" I had no idea. I'd answered all of them truthfully. She said, "How about, 'Have you ever lied to your boss?'" I said I hadn't. She pressed me until I came up with an occasion when I'd passed my boss in the hall. She said, "How are you?" and I said, "Fine." But I wasn't fine, I was in the middle of a cancer scare. Heh. In machine learning, when someone gets a "successful result" like that they publish a paper.
doe88 8y ago
The only thing I could think through reading this madness is as if the author was in the movie Brazil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(1985_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(1985_film)
simplecomplex 8y ago
The total fucking insanity of people in this thread defending a polygraph because they get their checks from the person giving it to them. “Yeah they don’t work but whatever just take them and forget about how pointless and absurd it is.” Reminds me of the attitude around school shootings. Grow a fucking spine you cowardly weasels. Frightening to think most of you work in intelligence/defense. What a crock of shit the whole thing is.
- dang 8y ago
  Would you please stop posting flamebait to HN and breaking the site guidelines in sundry ways? We ban accounts that do that, and you've done it a lot. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - simplecomplex 8y ago
    Oh no! You allow politically charged articles that have nothing to with tech and are inherently divisive, then pull the thought police bullshit when the kitchen gets hot. If you don’t want nasty discussion maybe apply the guidelines to the fucking articles not just the comments.
EliRivers 8y ago
On a related note, readers might enjoy Adam Curtis' piece about intelligence agencies. The crux of his argument is that often, they're not magic super-spies; often, they're pretty bad at their job. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-3149-963f-47bea720b460 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-...
TuGuQuKu 8y ago
I'd always thought I was a good person. Now I wasn't sure. Laughed out loud at this part. "It wasn't until my interviewer for a position at The Torture Center questioned my unflinching loyalty to authority -- that, until now, I had been certain was absolute -- that I began to doubt if I was really a good person"
- dang 8y ago
  This breaks the site guidelines, both because it's ideological flamewar, and more subtly because it doesn't do this: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." Can you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here?
  - TuGuQuKu 8y ago
    Please follow this rule when reading my posts: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." You've disappointed me with your disingenuous misinterpretation of my comment and I strongly suggest you no longer reply to my posts.
    - dang 8y ago
      It seems clear from your account history that you don't want to use HN as intended, so I've banned the account. If you decide you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
Mielly 8y ago
>I felt like Neville Longbottom when he drew the sword of Gryffindor and advanced on Lord Voldemort. Oh gosh please no, what an utter embarassment to read.
ALittleLight 8y ago
>To their credit, DIA didn't tell any other agencies they'd taken my badge and debriefed me. Weeks later, my CIA clearances were still active. I believe the polygraph is junk, but how is it to the DIA's credit that they don't notify other agencies when an employee fails a background check? I also think the author is taking things too personally. I agree it seems like a strange and poor requirement that you sit in a chair and be berated or called a liar for a few hours but it also doesn't seem so horrible. If this is the best the agency can do for interrogation and background checks - so be it. If you don't like doing that then find a different job.
DoctorOetker 8y ago
>Similarly, I urge my children to steer clear of any job that requires a polygraph. That rules out entire professions: National Security, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and Pharmacy. Pharmacists need to take polygraphs? I never thought about that. Is this to prevent pharmacists from dealing drugs? Is this a strictly US thing, or doe pharmacists in say Europe also take quasi routine polygraphs?
- Kenji 8y ago
  I think polygraphs are an American thing in general. In Central Europe you literally never hear about them. I think the population believes they are bogus, so they're unpopular.
  - DoctorOetker 8y ago
    I would hope this is true. But sadly I am not so sure: I live in Ghent, Belgium, a developed Western European nation. You can look up a lot of debate by googling "paragnost politie" and you will see results from Belgium, Netherlands, ... basically psychics, mediums and hypnotists working for / with the police. I think it was about 10 years ago (very rough guess) when I read in an article that the local police (perhaps just Ghent, perhaps nationwide) fired the last paragnosts. In the mean while perhaps they still don't use them, perhaps they have reverted back to using them... Intelligence and superstition form a very bad couple...
AndyMcConachie 8y ago
I just finished reading Deadly Deciepts by Ralph McGehee and this basically aligns well with how he describes the CIA. It's his memoirs of spending 25 years in the CIA and the bureaucratic shit show of a government job that it is. It would likely make a good comedy if they weren't responsible for so much pain and misery in the world.
DonGateley 8y ago
In 1967, as a soon to be graduate from a university in what is today called computer science, I applied to the NSA and nothing about that interview was nice. I failed the polygraph on two consecutive days and that's all she wrote. What tripped me up was the question "have you had any homosexual activity." The pen almost went off the graph when I truthfully said, "no." Where and when I grew up that was about the worst thing that could be said of a young male. On the trip to the interview my magic magnifying mind had wondered about whether sensitivity to a question alone could cause truth to appear to be a lie. Of course the question that popped into my mind which I anticipated was the question on homosexual activity. Well, having thought about it beforehand, sure enough I reacted strongly. It was just as well because the overall interview had shown me that I didn't want to work there anyway but it was still traumatic to be accused of lying and about that in particular at that time. For a short period of time I questioned my sexuality but can say that in the intervening 51 years there has not been one moment when I considered homosexual behavior. This is not to say anything negative about homosexuality, just how one's fear of responding to a question can cause one to respond negatively even with a truthful answer. Times were different then and my attitude was too. I doubt I'd fear the question today given that my accepting attitude toward homosexuality in general has been normalized.
- DonGateley 8y ago
  P.S. I am awfully glad that in those 51 years I was never again put in a polygraph situation such as an investigation. I just know I'd fuck it up.
droithomme 8y ago
> A few years into my Agency career, I took a battery of vocational and aptitude tests including the MMPI, a personality inventory. BTW, the MMPI is completely invalid scientifically, which is obvious from researching its history. Also, if anyone is interested in beating the MMPI, by learning how to give any particular result, it requires work and memorization since there's such a large number of questions and categories, but it's possible with study.
artsyxxx 8y ago
Perhaps these polys are practice for should they be caught in the field and interrogated by enemy agents?

245 points by giles_corey 8y ago

I had a contract doing a WebGL 3D space sim and graphing thing for a guy who was then going to recruit me to apply the technology for military applications. They wanted a browser-based simulator. But he told me that the application process in order to get clearance would involve a nasty investigation questioning everyone who knew me about all kinds of personal things. It seemed like a fun project that would pay decently, but it didn't make sense for me to subject myself to some kind of intense invasion of privacy or interrogation. The other part of it is that the software was going to be used for warfare planning. And I consider war to be unethical profiteering. In my opinion things like polygraphs and invasive investigations AND most things related to war and spying belong in movies rather than a sane and ethical world.

PaulRobinson 8y ago
I get why people think they should/could object to war and think choosing projects is enough. If you work on OSS, you're contributing to the military industrial complex indirectly. If you pay your taxes, yes, you pay for schools, but you're also paying for an intelligence system and armed contingent within your country. Most HNers are contributing to NATO. The Internet started life as a DARPA project in order to coordinate response after nuclear war. Be a conscientious objector if you wish, just don't build stuff on the Internet and complain about how evil all things related to defence are. And I'd be fascinated to know what forms of profiteering you consider ethical.
- ianai 8y ago
  I think of it differently. The economy really doesn’t need to employ everyone who needs work and money. Government could diminish this discrepancy any number ways. For one, they could establish stipends to help people achieve their basic needs. Or they could create public works projects or just government projects to ensure full employment with suitable accommodations for people’s varied needs. I look at defense spending as essentially this. Yes, the US has a huge defense department. Yes that means the US has the most might of any country. That even leads it to things like excesses. But it’s fundamentally the only version of my previous statement the political climate digests. If you want otherwise and are a US citizen then get involved in your civil duties.
- skybrian 8y ago
  I agree that open source code can be used for purposes you don't like. By using an open source license, you give up control. (But should you retain that sort of control over everything you do? I'm unconvinced.) I don't believe that ethical thinking has to be all or nothing. Not taking some projects makes them a bit harder and more expensive to recruit for and helps you sleep better at night, if that's the sort of thing that bothers you. Not paying your taxes is something you can go to jail for, which seems like a bad trade.
phyller 8y ago
> And I consider war to be unethical profiteering Do you mean all war? Or something more limited, like conflicts involving the US over the past 20 years. Or, only for the initiators of conflict. I find that line of thinking hard to justify after the most basic application to actual historical events. Like when Finland was defending itself against Russia, was Finland attempting unethical profiteering? What should they have done instead?
- adventured 8y ago
  There are plenty of examples of ethical foreign military actions as well. The US stopping genocide in Europe with the Kosovo war, for example, was ethical. If a people or nation can't defend itself from an aggressor (eg the UNC & South Korea vs China & North Korea), it's more than reasonable that a stronger power step in to help with that defense if it's willing to do so. The first Gulf War was also an ethical intervention of 30 nations vs Iraq, to push them back out of Kuwait.
  - ekianjo 8y ago
    The problem is that its inconsistent. For every ethical action out there how many dozens of other wars are completely ignored by the same powers? That is what makes the ethical stance highly doubtful.
    - phyller 8y ago
      Not sure I follow your logic. So if the US doesn't intervene to stop genocide in the Sudan, it is unethical for them to stop genocide anywhere else? If the US was to get involved in a war every time they thought something unethical was happening would that be good? If the US made a policy to never intervene anywhere, even if trivial intervention could improve the lives of millions, would that be good? I find that people have strong opinions about war and are happy to share them, but often don't seem to have thought them through at all. Why should either war everywhere or war nowhere make sense? Is there any room for good judgment, to weigh ethics, ability and consequences, and have a different approach in different situations? There is an entire field of philosophy and ethics around this that has been developed in the Western world and continues to be researched and debated, called just warfare. It is actually used, at least in the US, to inform decisions about rules of engagement and legal or illegal tools and tactics. In fact it is required learning for future officers in the US military, at least in the Air Force.

csense 8y ago

If they know polygraph doesn't work, why do they still do it?

lalaland1125 8y ago
It does somewhat work in the same way that homeopathy somewhat works. The placebo effect of convincing people that it works produces some results on naive people. Not to mention that eliminating the polygraph would require someone to admit that they were wrong about using a polygraph.
JohnStrangeII 8y ago
From what I've read about it, it works to some extent as long as people believe in it. They want to get their clearance and believe cheating could be detected, so they tend to be more truthful. It's based on intimidation and observation. The examination starts when you enter the building and stops when you leave it.
- dev_dull 8y ago
  Something that tells the truth inconsistently and nondeterministically sounds worse for our society than just asking the question under oath.
  - droithomme 8y ago
    It's not inconsistent though. It's never caught a single spy. So it's got a 100% false negative rate. That's very consistent and reliable.
Theodores 8y ago
Because belief is not rational. The people that passed the polygraph tests and administer them to others may acknowledge the flaws but they still 'know' that a lie detector is the best they have got. They also know that some people will just confess at the thought of being wired up to such a machine, to give evidence that, unlike the lie detector, is admissible in court. The most interesting story is how the authorities nabbed the guy who was most dedicated to dismissing the lie-detector baloney: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/12/polygraph-critic-trial-lie-busters-doug-williams https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/12/polygraph-cr... His consulting work of helping people pass lie detectors was his downfall. Had he just stuck to campaigning against the lie detector and not wanting to offer services to those needing to pass a lie detector test then all would have been okay for him and he would not be having to serve one of those silly 100 year sentences that American justice demands.

YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago

>> To prepare for the test, I read A Tremor in the Blood by David T. Lykken. The book described the use of control versus relevant questions as well as countermeasure such as butt-clenching. This explains that other thing I read yesterday, in a different article about the polygraph test: "There may be something that's put on the tip of the finger that records blood flow and we also use something called a movement detector which is on the seat and picks up if you're trying to beat the test," Prof Grubin explains. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45736631 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45736631 So that's not a "movement detector". It's a butt-clench detector. That's just the level of seriousness I'd expect from modern-day sorcery with wires and computers, instead of fetishes and incantations.

cryoshon 8y ago
not to mention that butt-clenching is just the simplest way of nonvisibly messing with your vital signs. a guy walking in off the street can butt clench. once you get into some of the intermediate level buddhist body awareness studies, you won't need the butt clench to cause your muscle tenor, heart rate, body temp, and respiration to respond to your will.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

polythrowaway 8y ago

I was a team leader at a USSOCOM unit and had to take a poly to be read into a couple of three-letter agency programs. In the middle of the test, the smug 23 year old fresh college grad administering the thing tells me I'm being deceptive and obviously support jihadi terrorism. This as I'm getting ready to leave on my 12th deployment. I've never wanted to so violently break someone's face as right then in that moment.

kungtotte 8y ago
I'm picturing that scene from The Rock where Ed Harris chews out that young staffer who questions him.
- phyller 8y ago
  If that statement was actually part of the test, that poor guy had a very dangerous job. "Might as well put the new guys in there, if they get killed we don't lose someone more valuable."
poly2throwaway 8y ago
When administering the test some examiners will tell the subject they failed just to see the reaction or if they will admit to something. All though, it would be a poor choice to do this to someone who had taken multiple screening polys.
crististm 8y ago
I hate it when people do this. What's the better comeback/reaction to this frame? (apparently, my verbalized fuck-off, tamed or not, is not the best approach)
- craftyguy 8y ago
  "I'm sorry, that's not true.", then wait for them to continue the test?
  - 8y ago

viraptor 8y ago

> That rules out entire professions: ... and Pharmacy. Pharmacy in the is requires a polygraph? I didn't expect that. It's not required in other Commonwealth countries as far as I know.

ap_org 8y ago
In the United States, the Employee Polygraph Protection act includes blanket exemptions for federal, state, and local governmental agencies, as well as exemptions for security services (such as guards who transport cash) and for those who handle or transport drugs.
- MrMorden 8y ago
  And many states prohibit polygraphs for all private-sector employers.
fphhotchips 8y ago
The USA is not a Commonwealth country - they formally lost that membership when they declared independence (and informally when they dumped a shipment of tea into a harbour).
- codingdave 8y ago
  If you are going to get specific about history like that, then we formally lost that membership with the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Revolutionary War, not the Declaration of Independence, which formalized why we started fighting it.
walshemj 8y ago
That's because mi5 and 6 in the 50' thought it was a load of hokum and had a lot of influence with the commonwealth nations.

everdrive 8y ago

"I was surprised. It's an important book about her field, I would have thought all polygraphers knew of it." Unsurprisingly, these guys tend to have a lot of turn-around, and are not necessarily spending time researching their craft.

kodablah 8y ago

Maybe it is how it's written, but this person's entire career reads like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors. Even though they say the job is among the happiest times of their life, it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have, especially in the public sector. I'd have given the middle finger right away knowing I can find enjoyable work sans harassment. To put it crudely, I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles. Instead of telling your kids to avoid working at places with a polygraph, how about instilling some confidence and make it clear to them that if they are/become really good at what they do, they have the leverage to not put up with these things (at least in non-depressed employment markets).

icebraining 8y ago
How does "leverage" get you a job in Intelligence without passing a poly?
- joncrane 8y ago
  The leverage is the ability to make the same amount of money in a non-cleared role.
- grkvlt 8y ago
  By leveraging the fact that one is a UK citizen, and applying to SIS or GCHQ, I assume? Most other countries perform in-depth background checks, rather than relying on pseudo-science, when it comes to matters of national security.
  - ganoushoreilly 8y ago
    The background investigations are still performed, the poly is an additional layer added on, so that's the only real formal difference between countries.
    - MrMorden 8y ago
      I really want to believe that polygraphs are just used as an interrogation tool and not as a substitute for the SSBI. But the FBI gave Nada Nadim Prouty an SCI clearance even though she wasn't even lawfully present in the US, let alone a citizen. She was working for CIA when the next investigation was due, and they didn't have a problem either.

polyfolly 8y ago

Throw away account. I get one every 5 years for my clearances. After having several, I view it as just another BS hoop to jump. Obviously it does not work as a lie detector, but it’s an excellent tool for interrogation. At least that’s my conclusion. Just answer yes and no. They’ll say you are almost done, but have an issue with one question, and want you to explain more. Don’t explain anything; just say “I don’t know“ and you are answering truthfully. Just stay relaxed, calm, and bored.

throwawaypolly 8y ago
Throwaway as well. FWIW I would estimate that 85% of my colleagues that discuss their poly experience view it as the same. It is an interrogation prop masquerading as science. The poly is subjective, as evident by the few times I have failed, re-tested, and passed. If I were lying the first time and did not change any answers, how can I pass the second time? The author alluded to it in her writing, but all of the test administrators have read up on methods of defeating the polygraph exam. Often, the "I've never heard of it" line is a lie.
- polyfolly 8y ago
  Now that I think about it, it probably is useful for initial job screening. More like a psychological test to screen out those that get too riled up over stuff. Though that really has more to do with age. The first one I had took three hours. Years later, the recent one was 1 hour. The one thing the intel community does want to screen out are rash decision makers. So it’s probably excellent measure of one’s ability to keep cool under pressure.
  - Waterluvian 8y ago
    It would help me screen out jobs I don't want. Would never want to work somewhere that sees employees that way.
  - jancsika 8y ago
    > More like a psychological test to screen out those that get too riled up over stuff. If that's is the case, then a nasty side-effect is to weed out the people who as a general principle refuse to put up with abuse as a basic condition of their potential job. Maybe a small deal if you're only hiring James Bond-style spies, but a big deal if you're mainly hiring analysts. Imagine in a FLOSS project that I force all pull-request makers to read through my recursive, non-deterministic set of makefiles and fix a bug there. How many high-quality pull requests will I accept under such a system vs. simply assessing pull requests on their merit? Of course that's not a fair comparison. I apologize to polygraph operators for it. :)

irundebian 8y ago

A little bit unrelated: Are they any credible resources which give insights on how it is like to work for these three letter agencies?

nyolfen 8y ago
they're a bit dated but you should check out phil agee's books. his first one in particular was very scandalous.

YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago

>> The examiner came back. "You're having a problem with one of the questions. Do you know which one?" I had no idea. I'd answered all of them truthfully. She said, "How about, 'Have you ever lied to your boss?'" I said I hadn't. She pressed me until I came up with an occasion when I'd passed my boss in the hall. She said, "How are you?" and I said, "Fine." But I wasn't fine, I was in the middle of a cancer scare. Heh. In machine learning, when someone gets a "successful result" like that they publish a paper.

doe88 8y ago

The only thing I could think through reading this madness is as if the author was in the movie Brazil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(1985_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(1985_film)

simplecomplex 8y ago

The total fucking insanity of people in this thread defending a polygraph because they get their checks from the person giving it to them. “Yeah they don’t work but whatever just take them and forget about how pointless and absurd it is.” Reminds me of the attitude around school shootings. Grow a fucking spine you cowardly weasels. Frightening to think most of you work in intelligence/defense. What a crock of shit the whole thing is.

dang 8y ago
Would you please stop posting flamebait to HN and breaking the site guidelines in sundry ways? We ban accounts that do that, and you've done it a lot. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- simplecomplex 8y ago
  Oh no! You allow politically charged articles that have nothing to with tech and are inherently divisive, then pull the thought police bullshit when the kitchen gets hot. If you don’t want nasty discussion maybe apply the guidelines to the fucking articles not just the comments.

EliRivers 8y ago

On a related note, readers might enjoy Adam Curtis' piece about intelligence agencies. The crux of his argument is that often, they're not magic super-spies; often, they're pretty bad at their job. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-3149-963f-47bea720b460 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-...

TuGuQuKu 8y ago

I'd always thought I was a good person. Now I wasn't sure. Laughed out loud at this part. "It wasn't until my interviewer for a position at The Torture Center questioned my unflinching loyalty to authority -- that, until now, I had been certain was absolute -- that I began to doubt if I was really a good person"

dang 8y ago
This breaks the site guidelines, both because it's ideological flamewar, and more subtly because it doesn't do this: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." Can you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here?
- TuGuQuKu 8y ago
  Please follow this rule when reading my posts: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." You've disappointed me with your disingenuous misinterpretation of my comment and I strongly suggest you no longer reply to my posts.
  - dang 8y ago
    It seems clear from your account history that you don't want to use HN as intended, so I've banned the account. If you decide you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

Mielly 8y ago

>I felt like Neville Longbottom when he drew the sword of Gryffindor and advanced on Lord Voldemort. Oh gosh please no, what an utter embarassment to read.

ALittleLight 8y ago

>To their credit, DIA didn't tell any other agencies they'd taken my badge and debriefed me. Weeks later, my CIA clearances were still active. I believe the polygraph is junk, but how is it to the DIA's credit that they don't notify other agencies when an employee fails a background check? I also think the author is taking things too personally. I agree it seems like a strange and poor requirement that you sit in a chair and be berated or called a liar for a few hours but it also doesn't seem so horrible. If this is the best the agency can do for interrogation and background checks - so be it. If you don't like doing that then find a different job.

DoctorOetker 8y ago

>Similarly, I urge my children to steer clear of any job that requires a polygraph. That rules out entire professions: National Security, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and Pharmacy. Pharmacists need to take polygraphs? I never thought about that. Is this to prevent pharmacists from dealing drugs? Is this a strictly US thing, or doe pharmacists in say Europe also take quasi routine polygraphs?

Kenji 8y ago
I think polygraphs are an American thing in general. In Central Europe you literally never hear about them. I think the population believes they are bogus, so they're unpopular.
- DoctorOetker 8y ago
  I would hope this is true. But sadly I am not so sure: I live in Ghent, Belgium, a developed Western European nation. You can look up a lot of debate by googling "paragnost politie" and you will see results from Belgium, Netherlands, ... basically psychics, mediums and hypnotists working for / with the police. I think it was about 10 years ago (very rough guess) when I read in an article that the local police (perhaps just Ghent, perhaps nationwide) fired the last paragnosts. In the mean while perhaps they still don't use them, perhaps they have reverted back to using them... Intelligence and superstition form a very bad couple...

AndyMcConachie 8y ago

I just finished reading Deadly Deciepts by Ralph McGehee and this basically aligns well with how he describes the CIA. It's his memoirs of spending 25 years in the CIA and the bureaucratic shit show of a government job that it is. It would likely make a good comedy if they weren't responsible for so much pain and misery in the world.

DonGateley 8y ago

In 1967, as a soon to be graduate from a university in what is today called computer science, I applied to the NSA and nothing about that interview was nice. I failed the polygraph on two consecutive days and that's all she wrote. What tripped me up was the question "have you had any homosexual activity." The pen almost went off the graph when I truthfully said, "no." Where and when I grew up that was about the worst thing that could be said of a young male. On the trip to the interview my magic magnifying mind had wondered about whether sensitivity to a question alone could cause truth to appear to be a lie. Of course the question that popped into my mind which I anticipated was the question on homosexual activity. Well, having thought about it beforehand, sure enough I reacted strongly. It was just as well because the overall interview had shown me that I didn't want to work there anyway but it was still traumatic to be accused of lying and about that in particular at that time. For a short period of time I questioned my sexuality but can say that in the intervening 51 years there has not been one moment when I considered homosexual behavior. This is not to say anything negative about homosexuality, just how one's fear of responding to a question can cause one to respond negatively even with a truthful answer. Times were different then and my attitude was too. I doubt I'd fear the question today given that my accepting attitude toward homosexuality in general has been normalized.

DonGateley 8y ago
P.S. I am awfully glad that in those 51 years I was never again put in a polygraph situation such as an investigation. I just know I'd fuck it up.

droithomme 8y ago

> A few years into my Agency career, I took a battery of vocational and aptitude tests including the MMPI, a personality inventory. BTW, the MMPI is completely invalid scientifically, which is obvious from researching its history. Also, if anyone is interested in beating the MMPI, by learning how to give any particular result, it requires work and memorization since there's such a large number of questions and categories, but it's possible with study.

artsyxxx 8y ago

Perhaps these polys are practice for should they be caught in the field and interrogated by enemy agents?