Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That just means the interview process is selecting for only completely uninformed idiots. What does that say about the resulting organization?


You don’t understand what you’re talking about. It’s an open secret in CDC circles that the polygraph is not effective at catching trained liars, more of a ritual than anything. The polygraph is not a test for how gullible or misinformed you are. It is mostly a test for two things:

1) are you willing to play by the rules and follow orders, even if sometimes they don’t make sense?

2) if you are being lightly interrogated, do you immediately freak out and tell the interrogator everything? Do you have a really bad reaction to pressure?

If you don’t match these criteria then you probably aren’t fit to know extremely sensitive government secrets. But like I said, it’s more of a ritual than anything, the value for even those two tests is unproven.

Even smart and informed people who know exactly what a poly does can say and do things they wouldn’t normally when they’re strapped to a chair, hooked up to machines, and being yelled at for hours


I think that is true, but not the whole truth (staying on theme). It is an interrogation, but it isn’t meant, or likely, to catch a trained, hardened spy or someone that can stand up to interrogations. It is to attempt to find if there is information that would make someone a bad candidate for a clearance, the same as the general background check is doing. If you are in massive debt, you are at much higher risk of being bribed. If you are cheating on your wife, and attempt to hide it during your polygraph, you are at much higher risk of being blackmailed.

It isn’t going to “catch” everyone but it is another way to reveal people with vulnerabilities that could be exploited. I think the real issue is people that “fail” the polygraph, since it isn’t actually a lie detector in any sense. It would be better if they just considered it a polygraph assisted interrogation.


Yep, IIUC blackmail or coercion is one of the primary concerns. Looking at people who sold out to foreign actors I think financial troubles are the #1 reason


>strapped to a chair, hooked up to machines, and being yelled at for hours

I've done periodic polygraphs, both lifestyle and full-scope, every 5 or so years since 1997. None of mine have ever lasted longer than 30 minutes.

You just sit in a chair while wearing some straps and there's never been any yelling involved.

It's all quite prosaic and relaxing actually.

It has been my experience that the clearance investigation process is quite simple, although I lead a very boring and law-abiding life.

I know of some people who have had quite long polygraphs and failed them repeatedly but my hunch is that the examiner has the findings of the background investigation in-hand and is trying to clarify some findings.

Many people with past financial, drug, or legal problems have gotten through the process with no issues just by being open and honest with the investigators and polygraphers.

So yeah, if the background investigator interviewed a friend of a friend of a friend and was told that 20 years ago you used to get stoned in college and whip your dick out but when asked during the polygraph about past drug use you go "I've been a squeaky clean boy my whole life" you're gonna have issues.

The annual financial disclosure is much more stressful just because of all of the damned paperwork.


That’s a little comforting at least… only met one guy IRL who ever said “Yeah the polygraph was fine.” Everyone else said it was a miserable experience for one reason or another, even people who were very straight laced


That its a cult.


Commenter subjectsigma understands this. In a former life I had jobs that required a polygraph, and I was not in a cult, nor does the interview process select for uniformed idiots. Both of you are reacting to commentary that the author barely understands and that neither of you clearly understand.

Nobody in my circles seemed to think the polygraph was anything but a tool. In fact, the sibject is sometimes gossiped about in thise circles about the "relevancy" of the polygragh today anyways. The thing about buearacracy though is that change happens incredibly slow. If everyone decided to get rid of the polygraph alltogether today, it would still take some years to actually happen.


>Nobody in my circles seemed to think the polygraph was anything but a tool.

Just like the e-meter.

>buearacracy

Yeah, that's a cult.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: