They are probably now in rapid development now of a eye sensor that they can integrate into what they have presently. I bet you the customers are demanding it! ...Even if the sensor only works to some degree, it would discourage the customer base from defecting and augmenting with EyeDetect.  You can be sure that ALL  polygraph manufacturers, schools, and other interested parties are going to end up in the same room coming up with legitimate ways to discredit or eliminate EyeDetect.

We had discussions with Lafayette on this topic.  Also, Bruce White told me at NPA two years ago that he could buy a $100 sensor and have a solution for his Acciton instrument.  After I met with Canadian government officials, I heard that they gave $200K to Limestone to integrate an eye tracker.  I have not been able to confirm this rumor, so I don't know for sure.

The USG spent $40 million on AVATAR.  The eye trackers and software were primitive by today's standards.  Ocular Motor was one of the most promising elements of AVATAR according to their researchers.  Ultimately, their funding stopped, and they have not been able to raise funding to build a commercial product to the best of my knowledge.  Investors don't like to invest in products build for the government, because they know it's a tough sell...

So, again, I agree completely with your assessment.  But we know how hard it is to build the algorithms and all the back end infrastructure.  Our engineers are mostly from Ancestry.com and Mediconnect - both were commercial successes.  We've spent millions of $, written over a million lines of code, and learned a lot.  We already have the algorithms for the polygraph physiological data.  As I posted earlier, Dr. Kircher built them under contract with the NCCA.  We could easily add them to EyeDetect if the science supported improved accuracy rates.   

As for the polygraph companies getting together to rally against EyeDetect, I guess this is a possibility.  But from what I've seen, there is a lot of bad blood between these companies.

Quote:


Neal, run this real-life scenario by Kircher and the other ivory tower academicians at Converus...

Hernando is doing 10 to 15 for attempted murder. He nearly killed his wife in a rage over her alleged infidelities. 

Hernando's parole has been approved. Soon, he will return to the community.

Hernando's girlfriend needs a "test" to prove she has been faithful to him during his incarceration.

Could EyeDetect be counted on to produce 86% accuracy in this case?

If not, why not?

With no disrespect intended, you are in sales, you have nothing to lose for the most part. If things do not work out at Converus, you can  jump on to the next craze in technology and show the same enthusiasm as you have demonstrated here.

Ha Ha - everyone hates sales people.  I am used to it and I have thick skin.  I have been extremely lucky in sales.  I went to Silicon Valley in 1990 and spent the next 22 years working for SynOptics/Bay Networks, Ascend Communications, Packet Engines, and Foundry Networks/Brocade.  These  4 companies were very successful.  If I only wanted to make money, I would go and work with my buddies at Nvidia, Arista Networks, or Palo Alto Networks.   

I am working at Converus to try and make the world a better place for my kids.  I'm not content to just complain about the abuses of polygraph; I want to be part of the solution.  It is doubtful that I will work full-time again when my tenure at Converus is over.  Most of you reading this will likely try to make that happen!  There have been insinuations that sales people will sell their souls to make a quick buck and couldn't care less about the human impact.  For me, that is just not the case.

This post certainly opens me up to a lot of abuse, but that's OK.  Bring it on.

By helping to peddle a "mind hack" with precious little in the way of field studies?  That is some sad shit.

Dan:

Sorry you feel I am a sad case and have sold my soul. 

I just looked at your website again.   It says you do PCSOT exams for a living, which is a screening test.  I don't understand how you can rail against polygraph on this site and also do it  for a living.  What am I missing?   

And why so much anger?  I have tried to be polite.  You may view me as misguided, but can't the posts be civil? 

Quote:


Neal,

AntiPolygraph.org has been online since 18 September 2000. The progress that we've helped to make is in public education about polygraphy. We've made accurate information about polygraphy (including the "secrets" that the polygraph community doesn't want the public to know) available to all. We've also documented how the polygraph can be trivially defeated using simple countermeasures, and we've documented that fact that the polygraph community is unable to detect such countermeasures.

We've helped convince many people not to submit to polygraph "testing," and we've helped many polygraph victims understand why it's not their fault, but rather that they are the victims of a state-sponsored pseudoscientific fraud.

Banning polygraphy from the American workplace will require broad public understanding that it's a sham. So our focus remains on public education.

Dan
Converus management probably has no idea he is even on this site. I dealt with white collar criminals for the better part of my career before being transferred into intelligence section.  Harris is like many of those con men I dealt with that are relentless.  They wear people down and keep counterpunching as that is how they survive and reach his or her objectives. While I am sure Harris is no criminal, his behavior patterns mimic the ones I am referring to.   From an investigative opinion, for which I was fortunate to be able to retire from due to having in 25 years, despite the only polygraph failure I had, he is desperate for information.  He probably came to this site as a last resort and not realizing the background of the posters.
When I made my first post, it contained the May 17th press release from Lafayette ending the business relationship. When you use the wayback machine to look at the Converus website and view Partners, Lafayette was listed all over the place to include foreign countries. When you look at it now, it is much different. The only partner that is listed more than once is Ruiz Protective Services in TX.  Most of the partners are in foreign countries and no strong U.S. presence. Losing Lafayette probably brought the house down in Utah. This reseller deal gave them instant credibility.  George M made a comment on one of my posts regarding federal usage.  I think all of that will stop once President Trump learns that Mark Cuban is a major investor in Converus.  For those on the site that do not know the history, Cuban has political aspirations and goes after Trump every chance he gets as he is angry over Clinton losing.  Harris came to this site for one reason only, and that was to obtain information that could help sell EyeDetect and possibly pick up some other data of value. He is no other interest in this site other than that.  Posting a photo of himself with Mark Cuban should also tell you something.

I suspect something bad happened, and more than just once during the usage of EyeDetect.

Nope.  Since we are cloud based, we know when every test is administered.  Lafayette does not run tests - their partners or customers run them.

I doubt they told Converus the whole truth either.

Yes, it is certainly possible that Lafayette did not tell us everything that went into their decision.  That is their right.

That Harris guy probably did everything possible to prevent them from making that decision.

Nope, I was merely informed of their decision.  That's all.  I clearly understood the impact, but it's not like they asked for my opinion before making the decision.   

My guess would be an exam was conducted and the polygraph was in conflict with EyeDetect or vice versa

EyeDetect and polygraph both have error rates, so of course there will be cases of misalignment.  Lets assume two tests are 86% accurate.  .86 x .86 = .74; so if the test questions were identical the agreement rate should be 74% and the disagreement rate should be 26%.  Many examiners view polygraph as ground truth and 100% accurate, so they will dismiss any misalignment as "EyeDetect doesn't work".  We understand this, but there isn't much we can do about it.

Also I think since there is no Inteview or Interrogation component to EyeDetect that was also creating some conflict in techniques and methodology.   

EyeDetect is a tool to gather eye data, just as a polygraph instrument gathers other physiological data.  Whether our customers interview to extract additional information after an EyeDetect test is up to them.  Since the test is completely automated, we do not train examiners on interview and interrogation techniques.  There are many others that train on I&I.  I can't comment on whether Lafayette viewed this as a conflict in methodology.  I don't know why they would, but I guess it is possible.

They must have made a significant investment as it was on the website and they had collateral brochures promoting it. 

This is incorrect.  Putting a photo and pricing on a website costs next to nothing.  Printing a few brochures doesn't cost much.  Lafayette sold part of their inventory, and we have offered to buy back their remaining inventory.  We certainly don't want them to lose money.