![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
An interesting night of television...
And that's saying a lot, coming from me. Or maybe I'm just tired.
I don't usually watch 60 Minutes, but happened by last night when they broadcast a piece presented by Mike Wallace on "brain fingerprinting." This idea - which apparently was of interest to the CIA to the extent that they funded it for a million dollars or more - is that when people are exposed to something they recognize, their brain emits a little "pulse" of recognition. Literally.
So the idea is that if you monitor the brain waves of a person, and you expose that person to, say, facts surrounding a crime that only the perpetrator of the crime would know, you can tell whether that person is (or is not) the criminal.
The focus of the piece was a black man who was convicted of murder twenty-some years ago when he was 16, and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole. He volunteered to be a test subject for the scientist who developed the technique, and based on the scientific evidence, the inmate's responses were consistent with what he said he was doing that night (attending a concert), and inconsistent with committing the crime.
This is an interesting development, and reminds me of an effect I once saw The Amazing Kresgin perform, back when I was a close-up magician...in fact, it was one of his trademark effects. First, Kresgin would have his evening's paycheck hidden somewhere in the auditorium. Then, he would tie a handkerchief to an audience member who saw the check being hidden. Finally, he would ask the person to start walking around, the idea being that the person would lead him - via different levels of resistance of motion - to the person with the check.
This is not to say that the funded research is hokum. Far from it. In fact, what is disturbing about it is that the response is involuntary and involves your own brain. It might come about that brain fingerprinting will become, like ordinary fingerprinting and DNA testing, an effective weapon for fighting crime. On the other hand, it may eventually become a way of forcing people to give testimony against themselves.
However that day is a long way off, for now. There are other fish to fry.
Cheers...
I don't usually watch 60 Minutes, but happened by last night when they broadcast a piece presented by Mike Wallace on "brain fingerprinting." This idea - which apparently was of interest to the CIA to the extent that they funded it for a million dollars or more - is that when people are exposed to something they recognize, their brain emits a little "pulse" of recognition. Literally.
So the idea is that if you monitor the brain waves of a person, and you expose that person to, say, facts surrounding a crime that only the perpetrator of the crime would know, you can tell whether that person is (or is not) the criminal.
The focus of the piece was a black man who was convicted of murder twenty-some years ago when he was 16, and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole. He volunteered to be a test subject for the scientist who developed the technique, and based on the scientific evidence, the inmate's responses were consistent with what he said he was doing that night (attending a concert), and inconsistent with committing the crime.
This is an interesting development, and reminds me of an effect I once saw The Amazing Kresgin perform, back when I was a close-up magician...in fact, it was one of his trademark effects. First, Kresgin would have his evening's paycheck hidden somewhere in the auditorium. Then, he would tie a handkerchief to an audience member who saw the check being hidden. Finally, he would ask the person to start walking around, the idea being that the person would lead him - via different levels of resistance of motion - to the person with the check.
This is not to say that the funded research is hokum. Far from it. In fact, what is disturbing about it is that the response is involuntary and involves your own brain. It might come about that brain fingerprinting will become, like ordinary fingerprinting and DNA testing, an effective weapon for fighting crime. On the other hand, it may eventually become a way of forcing people to give testimony against themselves.
However that day is a long way off, for now. There are other fish to fry.
Cheers...
no subject
As background, I knew a polygraph expert once. He was very good and was often used by Nevada casion management to help investigate theft. He gave me a polygraph test, trying to guess a card I picked. I totally fooled the polygraph, but since he was a very canny questioner, he tricked me into actually admitting which card I had picked. I was quite chagrined.
I learned that the techniques used by the examiner were as much as, or maybe more important than, the polygraph itself, which is only an indicator at best.
Of polygraphs and brain "fingerprints"
The theories behind the operation of a polygraph and brain fingerprinter would appear to be similar. The idea in both cases is that a physiological response occurs when the subject is presented with information, or asked to answer questions.
The main difference between the two would appear to be (and I'm basing this on some old reading and a lightweight treatment on TV) that the polygraph measures heart rate, skin resistance, and breathing rate, while the brain fingerprint goes directly to the source and registers electrical pulses in the brain.
Practically speaking, one can learn to control heart rate, etc. to fool a polygraph. The brain fingerprint would appear to be charting truly involuntary responses (in the sense of: once you comprehend the stimulus, the response has already occurred).
Of course, this approach faces an uphill battle in the courts. But then, so did ordinary fingerprinting and DNA testing, in their time.
Cheers...
Re: Of polygraphs and brain "fingerprints"
BTW - I sent you an email on Russian pronunciation:
A friend asked about the pronunciation of "Stolichnaya". I gave it as
"Stole-lich-*nigh*-a" but it occurs to me that I really don't know what I'm
talking about.
Could you be so kind as to set me straight?
Re: Of polygraphs and brain
Re: Of polygraphs and brain fingerprints
Here's my wisdom for your use, I learned it when the moose
And the reindeer roared where Moscow roars tonight...
'Tis pronounced stah-LEECH-nigh-a, with the stress on the second syllable.
Cheers...