Karlis Posted March 10, 2012 #1 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Researching ways to read the visual cues individuals display when they are lying. Read more... Comment from the article:In reality, they are already being field tested by the DHS and perhaps other federal agencies as well under the banner of “threat assessment” and “malicious intent detection.” While it might be beneficial in some ways, I think that the risks are much greater than the rewards, since the DHS seems to want to use this as a kind of pre-crime technology. They seek to create a world where if a computer says you’re lying, you become instantly criminalized, even if you are just darting your eyes around or your skin temperature is raised because you are nervous. ... This could result in wholly innocent people being treated as potential criminals just because they’re uncomfortable being questioned by police, ... -=-=- Is Big Brother closer than people think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted March 10, 2012 #2 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Hmmm... and that add for "Privacy Crisis" on the same page did not make you suspicious? There are many ways to tell a casual lie, from simple philosophical reasoning to eye movement. But if the liar is aware of them the whole nice machinery ceases to work. The most blatant example is that Israeli software that was capable of detecting lies in voice stress, they ran the test on Bill Clinton saying: I did not have sex with that woman and surprise, surprise, it showed that Clinton was saying the truth. Well, we know a little more about that now... Data collecting leads to a lot of data trash, that is what will protect us from data collectors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingAngel Posted March 12, 2012 #3 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Not reliable. The polices could hijack the software and make anyone guilty from innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Fluffs Posted March 12, 2012 #4 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Nice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Chubb Posted March 12, 2012 #5 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Interesting but even if it was 99.99% accurate its not reliable enough, like lie detectors there will always be those that can fool the software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted March 12, 2012 #6 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I would call it more reliable than people, but that is about it. All the clauses that people have already mentioned still apply. It does annoy me though, when people start using Hollywood concepts as foundations for real life paranoia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oen Anderson Posted March 14, 2012 #7 Share Posted March 14, 2012 80% accuracy is a lie. I challenge them to use it on me. I'll bet it would say I was lying 100% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhen Posted March 14, 2012 #8 Share Posted March 14, 2012 There is no one facial or bodily expression that can be taken as evidence of deceit. However, when you get a cluster of these, well, if it walks like a duck ... Here's an interesting TED video on liar spotting. I guess, in this case, House is right, "everybody lies". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhen Posted March 14, 2012 #9 Share Posted March 14, 2012 80% accuracy is a lie. I challenge them to use it on me. I'll bet it would say I was lying 100% of the time. Challenge accepted! It is impossible to fake a genuine smile. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smile#Duchenne_smiling And that's the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnockoutMouse Posted March 14, 2012 #10 Share Posted March 14, 2012 A man can spot when a machine translates corrupted code. I see only one reason the inverse shouldn't apply. Second-order simulacra would prove problematic, to say the least. It's a different story when you trade in secrets. If anything should be so worth keeping, it needs must also be kept from you. Veracity, for example. It has nothing to do with honesty. Your facial expressions cannot betray a certainty which escapes your grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniqueWolf Posted March 27, 2012 #11 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Oh shoot... Now I got to search for electronics before lying! (Joking) Anyways that looks like it would glitch a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now