[HN Gopher] Working on databases from prison
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Working on databases from prison
        
       Author : dvektor
       Score  : 646 points
       Date   : 2025-06-16 12:32 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (turso.tech)
 (TXT) w3m dump (turso.tech)
        
       | gavinray wrote:
       | Preston, great to see you made it this far!
       | 
       | We emailed, back when the post about your circumstances was
       | shared here in Nov. 2023. I knew you'd see success.
       | 
       | Huge shoutout to Jessica and UL for all the work they do, and
       | here's to a bright future ahead for you =)
        
         | dvektor wrote:
         | Thanks Gavin! Really appreciate the support.
        
       | voidUpdate wrote:
       | I'm glad to hear accounts of people in the prison system who are
       | given the opportunity to do some good. While I am admittedly less
       | sympathetic of dealers, the fact that the author recognises that
       | they were in a bad situation and have been able to make positive
       | progress since being given the opportunity to is really nice to
       | hear
        
         | komali2 wrote:
         | I don't know the circumstances of this case, but in many
         | states, e.g. Texas my home state, simply having above an
         | arbitrarily defined amount of a given controlled substance
         | automatically gets you tagged with "intent to sell." An
         | overloaded court system combined with a pay-to-win "justice"
         | system means a lot of people take the charge in their plea deal
         | even if they aren't dealers.
        
           | voidUpdate wrote:
           | In the part 1 article, the author mentions "making tens of
           | thousands of dollars a week" in relation to drugs, which is
           | why I talked about dealing. Obviously I've got no proof of
           | that or anything, so I'm happy to be proven wrong.
           | 
           | Drug charges are difficult. In my opinion, if you are using
           | drugs personally, I don't really see a problem. If you commit
           | some crime while under the influence which could harm another
           | person, eg driving while drugged, obviously that's a
           | different story, and coercing other people into it isn't
           | great either, but if you're just smoking in your own home,
           | its your body that you're altering. If you're selling to
           | other people, that feels a bit more iffy to me because you're
           | affecting other people with that... though I do realise that
           | preventing the sale is effectively the same as preventing the
           | usage...
        
             | int_19h wrote:
             | When it comes to selling, the nature of the drug also
             | matters IMO. I don't have a problem with people selling
             | stuff like cannabis or LSD to consenting able-minded
             | adults, but given the nature of opioids, there's no
             | responsible way to consume them outside of medical
             | necessity.
        
           | BryantD wrote:
           | Without judging this guy's current state, he makes it clear
           | in his first blog post that he was a dealer.
           | 
           | "So instead of coming back home broke and apologetic, I ended
           | up pretty deep into this and soon was making tens of
           | thousands of dollars a week, very much unapologetically."
           | 
           | Then, after his first sentence:
           | 
           | "I was left with the difficult choice of either living there
           | and walking to a temp agency with hopes of making $10.50/hour
           | doing manual labor (without an ID or social security card at
           | this point), or getting on a bus to NYC to see some
           | associates, and coming back in a week or so with $15-25k in
           | my pocket and living in comfy luxury hotels until I could
           | rent an apartment... I chose the latter: and obviously, was
           | back in prison after a short 14 months of addiction and
           | misery."
        
             | dvektor wrote:
             | Yes unfortunately for a long time my whole life revolved
             | around 'drug culture', and so did of all my 'friends' and
             | my entire social circle.
             | 
             | I certainly cannot act like I did not deserve to come to
             | prison, and it's definitely the only reason I am even alive
             | right now. Coming to prison, specifically in Maine, was the
             | best thing that ever happened to me.
        
       | JonKKelly wrote:
       | That is pretty awesome! I can imagine there are so many others
       | that would benefit from programs like the one you are a part of,
       | congratulations!
        
       | manesioz wrote:
       | God bless you.
        
       | chatmasta wrote:
       | How does the compensation work? The US prison system has a bit of
       | a nasty reputation when it comes to exploiting prison labor, so I
       | hope those practices aren't carrying over into these more
       | forward-looking types of initiative... but at the same time,
       | surely Turso isn't paying full SWE salary?
        
         | laufey wrote:
         | Just curious, why would you expect him to be paid less? I know
         | historically pay is bad for prisoners, but if he's working the
         | same hours and is just as productive as any other employee,
         | shouldn't he be paid the same? I could potentially see paying
         | someone less if they were coming in with much less experience
         | than what's usually hired for in the role, but that doesn't
         | seem to be the case here.
        
           | the__alchemist wrote:
           | I speculate: Supply and demand. He doesn't have many options,
           | so doesn't have leverage in negotiating.
        
           | chatmasta wrote:
           | Well that's basically what I'm wondering. Is this a normal
           | employment arrangement - subject to same state payroll tax,
           | labor laws, employee rights, etc - with the additional detail
           | that he resides in prison? Or does the employer need to go
           | through some gateway enforced by the prison with maximum
           | compensation or other restrictions?
           | 
           | But otherwise, in terms of why he'd default to being paid
           | less... yes, what the other commenter said: supply and
           | demand, aka leverage. Turso could choose to be a good citizen
           | and pay him the same as any other employee, but that's
           | subject to all the questions I posed above, regarding the
           | structural requirements placed on them as the employer.
        
             | glommer wrote:
             | I am the CEO of Turso. We are free to negotiate any salary
             | we want with him, the prison system doesn't put any caps,
             | up or down. We are paying him well, and certainly not
             | trying to enslave him or anything. There are some
             | restrictions on how the payments are made but not the
             | amount.
             | 
             | We also don't pay him healthcare, because he wouldn't be
             | able to use it.
        
           | koakuma-chan wrote:
           | I assume he doesn't have to pay rent while in prison and gets
           | free meals, so unless they take some of his income, he might
           | actually be doing pretty good.
        
           | wffurr wrote:
           | The 13th amendment specifically allows slavery of prisoners.
           | 
           | Edit: I don't mean to imply the author isn't paid fairly by
           | Turso. A few posts down, the CEO of Turso asserts that they
           | do pay fairly. The OP in this thread might reasonably wonder
           | about this because several states do in fact use prisoners as
           | unpaid slave labor.
        
             | code_for_monkey wrote:
             | finally, someone who took a humanities class!
        
               | shermantanktop wrote:
               | There are dozens of us. Dozens!
        
               | code_for_monkey wrote:
               | hacker news: a collection of the smartest tech minds on
               | the internet, but only for code!
        
             | mkoubaa wrote:
             | If I was a prisoner one day I think I'd rather spend my
             | days in slave labor than weird ethno-status games.
        
             | pyuser583 wrote:
             | It's unclear whether the carve out for prisoners applies to
             | just "involuntary servitude" or "slavery and involuntary
             | servitude."
             | 
             | In practice, only "involuntary servitude" has been used.
             | "Community service" - unpaid - is a very common low level
             | sentence.
             | 
             | The eighth and fourteenth amendments almost certainly
             | forbid enslavement - permanently becoming human property -
             | as a criminal sentence.
             | 
             | Even before the 13th amendment, enslavement as a punishment
             | not common, if it happened at all.
             | 
             | There is almost no case law on the 13th amendment. There
             | are no legal slaves in the US today, and there have not
             | been since the 19th century.
        
               | tristan957 wrote:
               | If we pay people 40 cents an hour just to say they aren't
               | slaves, they they are slaves for all intents and
               | purposes. They are put in poor working conditions working
               | for for-profit companies, making much less than minimum
               | wage. How is it legal for the State to not provide
               | sunscreen or shade for inmates doing outdoor manual
               | labor?
               | 
               | https://theappeal.org/louisiana-prisoners-demand-an-end-
               | to-m...
        
               | freedomben wrote:
               | I don't disagree that 40 cents an hour is ludicrous and
               | is only one notch above slavery, but I do think it worth
               | pointing out that the work for 40 cents per hour is
               | voluntary (i.e. they can quit or choose not to accept the
               | work), whereas "slavery" is very much not.
        
               | larkost wrote:
               | In many cases the work is not really voluntary, there are
               | sanctions for not taking it. Prisoners in some states are
               | regularly put into solitary confinement for not
               | "volunteering" to work these jobs (a punishment that some
               | areas deem torture). With that amount of coercion I can't
               | see them as voluntary, and so the slavery label is
               | awfully close to the mark.
        
               | freedomben wrote:
               | In those situations, I would agree that is pretty damn
               | close to the slavery mark.
               | 
               | I've worked with a lot of prison facilities though in
               | many states across the US and a few international, and
               | have never seen that. That's not to say it doesn't happen
               | of course, but out of curiosity do you (or anyone else)
               | know of any facilities/jurisdictions that do that?
        
               | tristan957 wrote:
               | There is an example in this NPR article.
               | 
               | https://www.npr.org/2023/11/13/1210564359/slavery-prison-
               | for...
        
               | brulard wrote:
               | A prisoner costs taxpayers around $50k a year on average
               | in US. If their "take-home" wage is $0.40/h, it may still
               | be generous.
        
           | TheGrumpyBrit wrote:
           | You can make the exact same argument about employers paying
           | different rates depending on the country the employee is
           | based in, and for all the same reasons.
           | 
           | Is there a good reason why a developer in Thailand or India
           | should be paid less than their colleague who works on the
           | same team, but is based in the US? Many companies believe so
           | - there's a significant difference in the cost of living
           | between those two employees, and employers believe it is fair
           | to adjust the salary to provide a similar quality of life to
           | both.
           | 
           | Equally, a person incarcerated in New York City doesn't have
           | the same living costs as a person who has to live in New York
           | City, so you could reasonably argue that any "Cost of living
           | premium" that a company offers to NYC based employees doesn't
           | need to apply to a person who doesn't experience those higher
           | costs.
        
             | koakuma-chan wrote:
             | > and employers believe it is fair to adjust the salary to
             | provide a similar quality of life to both
             | 
             | That's bullshit. E.g. electronics cost the same in all
             | countries.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Actually, no they don't. With various forms of VAT and
               | tariffs, things definitely do _not_ cost the same in all
               | countries.
        
               | koakuma-chan wrote:
               | The point is that they are definitely not cheaper than in
               | the US
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | Is that true still? I don't go searching prices in
               | foreign markets, but something like the RPi being a UK
               | piece of kit seems like it would now be more expensive in
               | the US compared to UK simply based on recent tariffs
               | being applied.
        
               | crote wrote:
               | Sure, but how much of your wage do you spend buying
               | electronics? The vast majority of _my_ salary goes to
               | fixed expenses like housing, food, healthcare, energy,
               | and transport. Those are all highly location-dependent.
               | 
               | In location A you might spend 80% of your salary on fixed
               | expenses, whereas in location B you only need to spend
               | 20% of that same salary to pay for those expenses -
               | leaving you with far more money for discretionary
               | spending.
        
               | koakuma-chan wrote:
               | For sure, but that doesn't justify doing that per
               | country. If you live in SF you could be spending 80% on
               | fixed expenses, but I'm sure that in the US there are
               | places where you could be spending 20%. This applies to
               | other countries as well.
        
             | frakt0x90 wrote:
             | Except prison has some very key differences from living
             | freely in another state or country. You cannot leave and so
             | don't have a choice about where you work. Even if cost of
             | living is low in prison, you often still have to pay for
             | being there and wages are far less than the cost. A
             | prisoner will be released one day and their cost of living
             | will skyrocket overnight. Do we want motivated hard working
             | people leaving prison with nothing so they end up back in
             | the same environment that got them there in the first
             | place?
        
             | tmoertel wrote:
             | > Is there a good reason why a developer in Thailand or
             | India should be paid less than their colleague who works on
             | the same team, but is based in the US?
             | 
             | Yes, and that reason is that people in most of the
             | developed world are free to say yes or no to job offers
             | based on their individual preferences. And, it just so
             | happens, in Thailand and India there are many people who
             | will happily say yes to offers that people in the US would
             | say no to. The cost of living explanation that companies
             | give is illusory; the reality is that they have to pay
             | enough to get people to say yes.
             | 
             | Now, you might ask why people in different countries say
             | yes to offers at different compensation levels. But I think
             | the answer is self evident: people will say yes to offers
             | when they believe that there are lots of other people who
             | will say yes to it. Under those circumstances, saying no
             | won't earn a higher offer but cause the company to give the
             | job to someone else.
             | 
             | Ultimately, then, regional prices are set by what the
             | locals are generally willing to say yes to.
        
               | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
               | My understanding is that top talent gets top pay,
               | regardless of their living arrangements.
               | 
               | Mediocre talent ... maybe not so much, but these are also
               | the folks that could be replaced by AI.
        
               | tmoertel wrote:
               | > My understanding is that top talent gets top pay,
               | regardless of their living arrangements.
               | 
               | Indeed. Top talent can say no to lower offers because
               | they are confident that companies are unlikely to find
               | other top candidates who will say yes.
        
             | Ray20 wrote:
             | >Many companies believe so - there's a significant
             | difference in the cost of living between those two
             | employees, and employers believe it is fair to adjust the
             | salary to provide a similar quality of life to both.
             | 
             | What a complete bs. If anything, in India it costs MORE to
             | achieve a similar standard of living than in the USA. In
             | India you can spend 3 times what a US worker gets paid -
             | and you'll barely have enough money to get the same level
             | of security that that worker gets.
             | 
             | Companies don't care, they pay the minimum amount that they
             | think will interest the worker for long-term employment.
             | And since in India or Thailand the workers don't have such
             | a wide choice in work - they will be paid less, just enough
             | to get them. And they pay the Americans just enough to get
             | them, it is just happening that for Americans this amount
             | are several times bigger. That's all here is.
        
           | code_for_monkey wrote:
           | I guess if you look at pay as solely a result of 'work done'
           | you'd come to this conclusion, and it should work this way,
           | but really its got more to do with the relationship between
           | employer and employee. A person in prison has a very
           | different legal status than someone who doesnt and they do
           | tend to get paid less.
        
           | komali2 wrote:
           | > but if he's working the same hours and is just as
           | productive as any other employee, shouldn't he be paid the
           | same?
           | 
           | He should, but the median salary of engineers in Taiwan is
           | like, 40,000 USD, vs SF which is 160,000 USD. Or London, if
           | one wants to argue something about English language ability
           | or whatever, is 80,000 USD. Literally half that of SF.
           | 
           | Salaries aren't determined by labor value, they're determined
           | by how well employers can collude in a region to get the
           | lowest possible rate while still being able to hire people.
           | Thus they somewhat tend to correlate with cost of living, but
           | not really, e.g. see London vs SF vs NYC. All correlations
           | are used as excuses, when the core, real, reason always comes
           | down to, employers will pay as little as they can get away
           | with.
           | 
           | This annoyed me enough that I started a co-op about it, and
           | we're doing pretty well. I'm still annoyed though. Apparently
           | glommer, the CEO, pays him "full salary" (market rate?),
           | which makes them a good person, but a bad capitalist. They
           | could easily pay basically a slave wage and leverage this
           | dude's ingrained passion for programming to get huge output
           | for almost nothing - that's what the rest of the industry
           | merrily does.
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | >Salaries aren't determined by labor value,
             | 
             | In a free market, very little is determined by its "value".
             | Clean drinking water costs pennies, but its value is far
             | higher. People in developing countries routinely spend
             | hours a day getting clean water, which works out to a price
             | far higher than even bottled water from for-profit
             | companies.
             | 
             | >they're determined by how well employers can collude in a
             | region to get the lowest possible rate while still being
             | able to hire people. Thus they somewhat tend to correlate
             | with cost of living, but not really, e.g. see London vs SF
             | vs NYC.
             | 
             | Is there any evidence there's more collusion happening in
             | London?
             | 
             | >employers will pay as little as they can get away with.
             | 
             | You're making it sound like this is some sort of profound
             | insight, or that companies are being extra dishonorable by
             | doing this, but literally everyone in an economy is trying
             | to pay "pay as little as they can get away with". When was
             | the last time you tipped a gas station?
        
             | Ray20 wrote:
             | > they're determined by how well employers can collude in a
             | region to get the lowest possible rate
             | 
             | Colluding is only one of the factors that influencing the
             | demand for labor. Moreover, in most regions it is a rather
             | insignificant factor. Typically, this is the degree of
             | economic freedom, protection of investments and capitals,
             | the level of regulation and the tax burden in the region,
             | not the degree of colluding.
             | 
             | > good person, but a bad capitalist.
             | 
             | Capitalism is not about evaluative characteristics, but
             | about descriptive ones. It is not "bad capitalists pay a
             | lot, good ones pay the minimum", but about "people tend to
             | pay minimum, so to pay the minimum is expected behavior of
             | capitalists"
        
           | whywhywhywhy wrote:
           | >but if he's working the same hours and is just as productive
           | as any other employee, shouldn't he be paid the same?
           | 
           | Why would the salaries all bump up to big American city
           | salaries instead of resting somewhere in the lowest range
           | worldwide? If we purely judge work completed.
           | 
           | If you're a remote worker your competition is the world not
           | people in the major city the company is based in.
        
           | blks wrote:
           | Because US constitution forbids slavery except as a
           | punishment. A lot of prisoners doing labour right now are
           | compensated literally pennies.
        
           | Ray20 wrote:
           | Because the level of payment almost always depends on the
           | level of competition for a particular person's work. When
           | you're in prison, there's practically no competition for your
           | work. So it's expected that he'll be paid much less.
        
         | glommer wrote:
         | I am the Turso CEO. We pay him a full salary, just not health
         | care benefits.
        
           | david927 wrote:
           | What you're doing is really wonderful.
        
             | glommer wrote:
             | I am just blessed and thankful that the Lord decided to
             | give me a chance to help what HE is doing on Preston's
             | life.
             | 
             | I've done nothing.
        
               | j-krieger wrote:
               | Amen.
        
           | 999900000999 wrote:
           | Your doing the Lord's work.
           | 
           | Even if you just paid him the state minimum wage, it would
           | stop him from having a giant employment gap.
           | 
           | The next step would be background check reform. A DUI record
           | isn't relevant to anything not involving driving.
           | 
           | Excluding a very small handful of SVU level crimes everything
           | should be wiped clean after 5 years or so.
           | 
           | I had an experience with a co worker who would brag about
           | robbing people, selling substances and when he got caught his
           | family money made it go away. He's a CTO at a mid sized tech
           | company now. Had he been poor he'd have a record and be lucky
           | to work as a Walgreens clerk.
           | 
           | Was the biggest "tough on crime" person I've ever met. I
           | think people with means don't understand if you don't have
           | money you can't afford bail.
           | 
           | Can't afford bail you'll just be indefinitely detained
           | without trial for months if not years.
           | 
           | Everything about the criminal justice system is about
           | exploitation. Get house arrest, that's a daily monitoring
           | fee. States like Florida are forcing released inmates to
           | repay the state for the cost of incarceration.
           | 
           | It's past fixing tbh, I'm personally hopping to immigrate to
           | a functional country soon.
        
             | glommer wrote:
             | The Lord is doing His work, in Preston's heart. I am very
             | humbled to given a chance to be a part of this.
        
               | focusedone wrote:
               | Reformed?
        
               | glommer wrote:
               | If you are asking me about my religion, I am a Catholic
               | convert, after 20+ years of obnoxious militant atheism.
        
               | badc0ffee wrote:
               | "Militant", really?
        
               | skeeter2020 wrote:
               | I don't read this as he thinks all Atheists are militant,
               | but that his own behaviour was obnoxious? If so, many of
               | us have met those.
               | 
               | It's nice to hear about someone who can change their mind
               | so completely; the trick is not to swing to the other end
               | of the spectrum, trading one absolute for another.
        
               | GoatInGrey wrote:
               | Militant atheists tend to embody anti-theism. It
               | typically manifests as active desire to dissuade anybody
               | from holding religious beliefs or performing religious
               | practices.
               | 
               | Any clergy, whether faithful or secular, has the capacity
               | to act in a militant fashion.
        
               | glommer wrote:
               | yes, and obnoxious too. You should have seen me.
        
               | Bowski23 wrote:
               | Indeed HE is! Many prayers are being answered! Thank you!
        
             | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
             | _> Excluding a very small handful of SVU level crimes
             | everything should be wiped clean after 5 years or so._
             | 
             | My understanding, is that's what the UK does, with an
             | exemption for certain jobs, like teachers and creche hosts.
             | In the US, I think some states have the ability to expunge
             | convictions. Not sure about federal crimes, though.
             | 
             | The "scarlet letter" of a past conviction is a very real
             | issue, and keeps some folks down. People can get past it,
             | though. I know folks that served time for murder, that have
             | very good careers, and people that have misdemeanor
             | records, that have always struggled.
        
               | wil421 wrote:
               | My state will automatically expunge non violent
               | misdemeanors after 2010, so if it happened before you
               | have to jump through hoops.
               | 
               | I know people who dropped out of college because they had
               | a very small drug charge, no use in finishing if you will
               | have a scarlet letter over your head forever.
        
               | aerostable_slug wrote:
               | That's really unfortunate. I work with people who were
               | formally justice-involved every day and their educations
               | have been an aid to them personally and professionally. A
               | felony or a "bad" misdemeanor (e.g. domestic violence)
               | isn't the end of the world, even in the modern US. People
               | can and do overcome the consequences of their mistakes
               | and thrive.
        
               | justin66 wrote:
               | Different states have rules about expungement, as far as
               | what happens automatically, what can be done if an
               | offender convinces a judge, and how much it all costs.
               | 
               | Federal crimes (and I don't think that applies in this
               | person's case since they're in a Maine DOC prison,
               | although drug crimes of this kind easily _could_ be
               | charged by the feds) aren 't usually expunged. Even if
               | you receive a pardon, the original crime (and a note of
               | the pardon) will exist on the record.
               | 
               | It's a really strange system. You're meant to lie and say
               | "no" during interviews after your conviction is expunged
               | if you are asked "have you ever been convicted of a
               | crime," although I believe in many states it's now
               | illegal to ask such a question.
        
             | dao- wrote:
             | > Was the biggest "tough on crime" person I've ever met. I
             | think people with means don't understand if you don't have
             | money you can't afford bail.
             | 
             | Or maybe they do understand. This kind of politics ensures
             | the privileged stay privileged.
        
             | crote wrote:
             | > The next step would be background check reform. A DUI
             | record isn't relevant to anything not involving driving.
             | 
             | This is already the case in some countries, including The
             | Netherlands. A background check is done for a specific
             | "profile", and convictions which aren't relevant for your
             | job-to-be don't show up. Someone with a DUI can't become a
             | taxi driver, but they should have no trouble getting a job
             | as a lawyer. Got convicted of running a crypto pump&dump?
             | Probably can't get a job as a banker, but highschool
             | teacher or taxi driver is totally fine.
        
               | BizarroLand wrote:
               | A surprising number of US states also drop crimes from
               | your background checks or legally forbid them from being
               | used against you after so many years, 5-10 on average, as
               | long as they aren't directly related to the job.
               | 
               | https://ccresourcecenter.org/state-restoration-
               | profiles/50-s...
        
             | derektank wrote:
             | >Excluding a very small handful of SVU level crimes
             | everything should be wiped clean after 5 years or so.
             | 
             | It's nice to think that people should be able to fully pay
             | back their debt to society but (a) criminal court
             | proceedings need to be public in a free society and if they
             | are public, people should be able to record and distribute
             | the results as private citizens if we believe in upholding
             | the principle of freedom of speech.
             | 
             | Even if it were possible to prevent this, (b) this does a
             | small but not entirely negligible harm to people that never
             | committed a crime by casting some doubt upon them. This is
             | most apparent for minority groups that are associated with
             | criminality; they experience worse employment prospects
             | when the state makes criminal records unavailable.
        
               | miki123211 wrote:
               | Criminal records should be available, but in a controlled
               | way.
               | 
               | Where I live (Poland), only the person itself can request
               | their criminal record from the state. This is a routine
               | procedure required by some employers, you can even do it
               | online these days.
               | 
               | Most if not all criminal offenses "expire" after some
               | years, how long depends on the offense. If there's
               | something you've been charged with but not convicted of,
               | it doesn't appear on the record.
               | 
               | This is easier to implement for us because there are
               | limitations on how media can report on criminals (no last
               | names for example). Even in the US, I think that system
               | could be workable. Instead of attacking distributions of
               | "unedited" criminal records, you'd have to target
               | employers and require them to only acquire the state-
               | approved versions.
        
             | keybored wrote:
             | > Your doing the Lord's work.
             | 
             | Excellent marketing. They get a remote worker who is (in HN
             | headhunter speak) a great and passionate talent. Of course
             | they have no risks on their side. And they get praised for
             | it on the very grassroots YC Combinator forum.
        
           | bregma wrote:
           | Is he paid in dollars or in cigarettes?
        
           | gwbennett wrote:
           | Bravo Zulu!!!
        
           | dl9999 wrote:
           | People like you give me hope for the world.
        
           | tommica wrote:
           | How does it exactly work in a scenario like this? Do you just
           | pay to his account, or does it somehow go through the prison
           | system?
        
         | UncleEntity wrote:
         | /me putting on my Law & Order hat
         | 
         | Why should the taxpayers be burdened by the results of his bad
         | decisions?
         | 
         | /me takes off hat
        
           | brettermeier wrote:
           | Because that's what a social community would do. But where
           | you probably are, such an approach is falsely labeled as
           | "communism" by MAGA anti-social assholes.
        
             | 1234letshaveatw wrote:
             | false labeling- Your lack of introspection is wild lol
        
               | y-curious wrote:
               | Ad Hominem is only bad if it's used against _my_ in-group
        
           | jrvieira wrote:
           | how does the taxpayer benefit from the inexistence of
           | rehabilitation programs?
        
             | UncleEntity wrote:
             | It's not mutually exclusive.
             | 
             | Someone can both work towards rehabilitation and pay their
             | 'debt to society'. If they earn over what it costs to house
             | them in a Maine prison then, by all means, let them keep
             | the excess earnings. If they earn $100k/year and the state
             | pays them $1.35/hr then there are deeper institutional
             | issues around prison labor exploitation which should be
             | addressed.
             | 
             | I used to have an uncle who was constantly in and out of
             | prison over drug-related issues and he would do all sorts
             | of work programs just to break up the monotony. Ironically,
             | none of these rehabilitation efforts did any good and what
             | finally 'set him straight' was the Three Strikes Law.
        
           | esseph wrote:
           | Taxpayers are clearly wasting money on this guy.
           | 
           | Sounds like he gets out in 10 months, and an incredible
           | amount of money gets spent keeping him there.
        
             | glommer wrote:
             | I wrote a letter to the judge to support his early release.
             | My initial plan was to hire him once he was out. I am very
             | sad he was denied his request.
        
           | BlarfMcFlarf wrote:
           | Imprisoning someone is also a great harm. That harm should
           | have a cost, so that it is not employed flippantly.
        
         | lo_zamoyski wrote:
         | > The US prison system has a bit of a nasty reputation when it
         | comes to exploiting prison labor
         | 
         | Do you mean for private interest? If so, I would agree that
         | prison labor should only be used for public benefit. And this
         | labor should be part of the sentence.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | Setting up an inmate for success after release is a public
           | benefit IMHO.
        
             | lo_zamoyski wrote:
             | Absolutely. But this is a separate question.
        
               | darthwalsh wrote:
               | No, it's related. In programming, the only employment
               | options are working for a government, for some
               | corporation, or trying to sell directly to individuals?
               | 
               | Somebody who had worked for a recognizable tech company
               | is far more hireable than somebody who is Self Employed
               | or who has worked for the government.
        
       | giztu wrote:
       | Somewhat relieved to see that this is the drugs prison guy, and
       | not one of the two pedo prison guys who sometimes post on HN with
       | their fake sob stories pretending to be hard done to while
       | concealing their depravity.
       | 
       | In contrast I'm glad to see this guy has been open and honest,
       | owning up to his mistakes and starting to turn his life around
       | and make amends for the harm he's caused others. Well done.
       | 
       |  _Edit:_ Please disregard that last paragraph. Just saw the
       | document @bjorkandkd linked.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | I tried to hire someone with a drug-related felony conviction
         | to work on a Rust project with me. The guy was awesome, and he
         | was super excited about the work we were doing.
         | 
         | Unfortunately, due to the circumstances of our world today, he
         | was understandably too anxious to move from his current job. He
         | worried he'd never be able to find employment as an ex-felon if
         | the runway ran out.
         | 
         | I felt really bad for the guy.
         | 
         | I wish things worked differently.
        
         | bastawhiz wrote:
         | Please see my nested reply to his comment, which shows that
         | @bjorkandkd is not only making assumptions, but that his
         | allegation is unsupported by even by the document that he
         | linked.
        
       | yu3zhou4 wrote:
       | A great read, the first part is also worth reading. I'm happy for
       | you Preston and wishing you all the best
        
       | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
       | > I quickly outgrew the curriculum, preferring instead to spend
       | ~15+ hours a day on projects and open source contributions.
       | 
       | TIL from 15-20yrs old I was a prisoner
       | 
       | But seriously, programs like these need to be made available to
       | more people, incarcerated or not. There's millions of people in
       | this country who have basically no access to employment. Remote
       | work could not only be a lifeline to those communities, it's
       | advantageous to employers and good for the economy.
        
         | code_for_monkey wrote:
         | shame were doing a large push to return to the office anyways
        
           | stronglikedan wrote:
           | there's a good reason for that, fortunately or unfortunately.
           | the numbers don't lie
        
             | Macha wrote:
             | Now if only someone could produce those numbers...
        
               | barbazoo wrote:
               | They don't lie whether they're there or not.
        
             | GuinansEyebrows wrote:
             | which numbers? the property values for big office
             | buildings?
        
               | barbazoo wrote:
               | A connection which hasn't been proven to be meaningfully
               | contributing to RTO.
        
               | code_for_monkey wrote:
               | which makes it worse right?
               | 
               | My take on RTO is that its a soft layoff. You can get rid
               | of a ton of people, reduce headcount, next quarters
               | numbers look good. The other reason? Managers just like
               | the office. Its a spot of manager power, they like that.
        
             | code_for_monkey wrote:
             | what is the good reason, can you tell me
        
       | code_for_monkey wrote:
       | and hear i am browsing hacknews at work on monday morning,
       | wishing I was still asleep. Really gives you perspective, I hope
       | you get out safe and sound and soon and things work out for you.
        
       | timvdalen wrote:
       | The Changelog recently did a long form interview with this guy:
       | https://changelog.com/news/refactored-in-prison-0X1D
        
       | b0a04gl wrote:
       | what if prison ends up becoming the most distraction-free dev
       | environment. no meetings, no slack pings, no linkedin recruiters,
       | just you, a terminal, and 10 years of uninterrupted focus. kinda
       | terrifying how productive that sounds
        
         | mcmcmc wrote:
         | No pings, just people who may decide to shiv or rape you
        
           | wavemode wrote:
           | Nobody gets shivved or raped in the kind of low-security
           | prisons where non-violent criminals go.
        
             | mcmcmc wrote:
             | It's more rare sure, but it still happens. Either way my
             | point was that romanticizing prison is a terrible take
        
         | rawgabbit wrote:
         | Don't give our overlords any ideas. Open plan offices are bad
         | enough.
        
         | financypants wrote:
         | Something like prison probably is the most productive
         | environment one could be in. It almost completely eliminates
         | the need for self discipline because it's all enforced.
        
         | msgodel wrote:
         | If you're not dating anyway and don't own your house outright
         | prison with computer access honestly doesn't sound bad at all.
         | 
         | No need to worry about rent, no need to worry about healthcare,
         | no need deal with all this social crap.
        
           | ty6853 wrote:
           | When I had a <3 year old demanding child I often thought
           | about how relaxing prison would be, with relatively normal
           | set sleeping, work patterns, and in some prisons guaranteed
           | personal space at night with at worst an adult roomate.
           | 
           | Just the thought of maybe being able to peacefully read a
           | book for 30 minutes, at times I almost wished to be
           | imprisoned...
        
             | shreddit wrote:
             | So two more years to go you say...
        
           | GuinansEyebrows wrote:
           | this is something you can freely achieve for yourself without
           | prison -- no need to speak this evil into existence haha.
        
         | koakuma-chan wrote:
         | What are disadvantages of living in prison?
        
           | yrds96 wrote:
           | Disregarding the lack of anywhere to go, and assuming no
           | enemies within the prison, I see no disadvantages.
        
             | SpaghettiCthulu wrote:
             | How's the food in prisons?
        
         | barbazoo wrote:
         | Almost sounds like you haven't watched season 3 episode 9 of a
         | little documentary called The Office.
        
         | h1fra wrote:
         | PaaS - Prison as a Service
        
         | keybored wrote:
         | Terrifying that slinging code for years on end is what one
         | aspires to as a free individual pondering asceticism.
        
       | mlissner wrote:
       | Maine's remote work program is an incredibly promising
       | development to prevent recidivism. The amazing thing about it is
       | that it gives _real_ jobs to prisoners that they can seamlessly
       | continue after they get out of prison. Normally when you get out,
       | it 's impossible to get a job, and the clock is ticking. This
       | leads to desperation, which leads to bad behavior.
       | 
       | There is a real risk of exploitation, but if it's properly
       | managed, remote work for prisoners is one of the most hopeful
       | things I've heard about the prison system. It gives people
       | purpose while there and an avenue to success once they're out.
        
         | lo_zamoyski wrote:
         | This sounds good. It is important that we recognize _all_ of
         | the purposes of punishment instead of overemphasizing one or
         | neglecting the other.
         | 
         | Punishment has three ends: retribution, rehabilitation, and
         | deterrence. It is important that you pay for your crime for the
         | sake of justice; it is charitable and prudent to rehabilitate
         | the criminal, satisfying the corrective end of punishment; and
         | would-be criminals must be given tangible evidence of what
         | awaits them if they choose to indulge an evil temptation, thus
         | acting as a deterrent.
         | 
         | In our systems today, we either neglect correction, leaving
         | people to rot in prison or endanger them with recidivism by
         | throwing them back onto the streets with no correction, or we
         | take an attitude of false compassion toward the perp by failing
         | to inflict adequate justice, incidentally failing the deterrent
         | end in the process.
        
           | tomrod wrote:
           | Rehabilitation is retribution.
           | 
           | So many things can never have full repatriation. The best we
           | can do is have society acknowledge, forcefully, the wrongs
           | done via prison sentencing.
           | 
           | But then many countries go wrong on policy - punitive
           | imprisonment leads to worse individual and social outcomes
           | than a rehabilitation focus.
        
           | ty6853 wrote:
           | One of the most baffling elements of the justice system is
           | how little the victim is involved in the justice. 'Society'
           | should not lord the lion's share of the justice decisions
           | over the victims. Quite often the victim would prefer
           | compensation and release over getting fuck all while the
           | perpetrator languages in prison at the tax dollar of the
           | victim.
           | 
           | Much of 'justice' has been usurped from the victim into a
           | jobs campaign for the state.
        
             | dfxm12 wrote:
             | I think you're confusing or conflating civil and criminal
             | courts. If someone breaks a law, that's generally a matter
             | for the state to decide in a criminal court. If someone was
             | damaged (i.e. if the victim feels the perpetrator owes them
             | compensation), that's a matter for them to bring up
             | themselves in the civil courts. These are separate
             | functions; one situation could be tried in both courts. A
             | famous example off the top of my head is that even though
             | OJ Simpson wasn't criminally convicted of murder of Nicole
             | Brown and Ronald Goldman, a civil court found him liable,
             | awarding tens of millions of dollars in damages, to be paid
             | to their families.
        
               | ty6853 wrote:
               | There's no element of the civil trial I'm aware of that
               | allows the prisoner to be released to perform activity to
               | compensate the victim. In practice imprisoning the perp
               | against the wishes of the victim robs them of their civil
               | awards, either by delay or denial.
        
               | cootsnuck wrote:
               | No, I don't think they are confusing those things. I
               | think they are critiquing the system at large and are
               | alluding towards alternatives such as restorative
               | justice.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | > A famous example off the top of my head is that even
               | though OJ Simpson wasn't criminally convicted of murder
               | of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, a civil court found
               | him liable, awarding tens of millions of dollars in
               | damages, to be paid to their families.
               | 
               | The trick here is to be fortunate enough to have a
               | biiiiig monthly retirement pension that the courts can
               | barely touch, or enough wealth to have already bought
               | your mother a nice house (though I now read OJ screwed
               | that up by not transferring her the title).
               | 
               | https://www.southcoasttoday.com/story/news/nation-
               | world/1997...
               | 
               | https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-
               | xpm-2000-dec-01-me-59847...
        
             | tired-turtle wrote:
             | Distancing the victim from the outcome of sentencing is by
             | design and, arguably, for the better in a democracy. Crimes
             | violate the social order, not just the victim. It behooves
             | us all to have a system wherein (in theory) the system, not
             | the victim, applies a set of rules to determine punishment,
             | as contrary as that might seem to one's sense of self,
             | morals, etc. It's a part of why "justice is blind."
        
               | freedomben wrote:
               | Also victims are nearly always emotionally involved, and
               | emotional-based decisions aren't generally good.
               | Punishments would be much more severe if it were up to
               | the victims.
               | 
               | If victims determined the sentences, I expect people
               | would spend _a lot_ more time in prison, way more than a
               | non-emotionally involved and wronged person would think
               | fair.
               | 
               | IMHO letting victims set the sentence would be the
               | _worst_ way to do it.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | It'd be such a mixed bag it wouldn't resemble anything
               | 'fair'. I know some people who are against capital
               | punishment even for obviously guilty serial killers. I
               | know some people would think capital punishment is called
               | for if you accidentally dinged their car door.
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | Most criminals aren't in a financial position to pay
             | compensation. And even if you get a judgment, good luck
             | ever collecting. When a drunk driver damaged some of my
             | property I didn't bother sueing him because he was
             | obviously a worthless deadbeat.
             | 
             | In most US jurisdictions the victim of a crime is allowed
             | to make a statement during the sentencing phase of the
             | trial. So the victim can certainly request release if they
             | want it although the judge isn't obligated to adhere.
        
             | bregma wrote:
             | You are baffled by the western concept of justice.
             | 
             | In western philosophy an offender is considered to have
             | offended against _society_ even if their crime is of a
             | personal nature. As such, they are tried, condemned, and
             | punished by society according to codified rules. A victim,
             | if there is one, is not really a part of this process.
             | 
             | There is a fundamentally sound basis for this philosophy,
             | including equity (different justice for different people is
             | no justice for anyone), impartiality, and respect for human
             | rights.
             | 
             | There are other philosophies of justice: for example, the
             | traditional "I'm strongest I get the best stuff" or "you
             | dissed me ima kill you." Some are codified similarly to
             | western justice ("killing a man is requires you pay his
             | heirs 100 she-camels of which 40 must be pregnant, killing
             | a woman is half that, killing a Jew one-third, and so on").
             | Others involve negotiation between victim (or their
             | families) and offender -- which often works out well, since
             | the offender is often is a position of power to start with
             | and is very likely come out on top.
             | 
             | The simple "an eye for an eye" is just the beginning of a
             | very very deep rabbit hole you can go down on the road to
             | enlightenment.
        
             | wat10000 wrote:
             | I strongly disagree. The victim is generally deeply
             | incapable of being objective about the situation. How many
             | perpetrators of domestic violence would go free because
             | their spouse is too scared to ask for proper punishment?
             | This is already a big problem with securing cooperation for
             | prosecution, and I'd aim to make that better, not worse.
             | You'd have enormous disparities in sentencing based on the
             | personality of the victim. Should mugging a vindictive
             | asshole carry a harsher sentence than mugging a nice person
             | who believes in second chances no matter what?
             | 
             | The justice system is pretty far from actual justice in
             | many cases, but this wouldn't get it closer.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | There are (institutional, complicated, well-ordered) civil
             | and criminal systems elsewhere in the world where victims
             | are much more directly involved in sentencing and
             | punishment, and you probably wouldn't want to live in one.
        
               | ty6853 wrote:
               | There are certainly differing personal opinions on what
               | they'd like to live under. For instance, Dutch lawyer
               | Michael van Notten moved from the western to to the xeer
               | system in the horn of Africa, and found it superior in
               | his personal estimation from the perspective of serving
               | victims, as documented in his book.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | A clan-based blood-money system? I reiterate the claim I
               | made previously: while you might enjoy reading about
               | them, you wouldn't want to live under one.
        
               | ty6853 wrote:
               | I don't see it as a binary option. Why can't we learn
               | from one another? I'm more interested in some of the
               | elements found in for instance that system, where the
               | victim can elect to prioritize restitution over
               | retribution when it leads to a higher likelihood they
               | will be made whole. I don't see any requirement that one
               | has to embrace everything about a societies' system to
               | find advantages in elements of it.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | Well, I'll just say, when I referred earlier to
               | institutionalized systems wherein victims are given
               | principal roles in meting out justice, I was specifically
               | using that word to contrast with things like xeer clan
               | law --- a system you just implied might be superior to
               | our common law system (it is not). There are "modern"
               | legal systems descended from that kind of oral tradition
               | honor law. You would not want to live under them.
               | 
               | Happy to keep nerding out on comparative legal stuff from
               | around the world! Just keeping this grounded in "you
               | probably wouldn't enjoy living somewhere where your
               | landlord can have you imprisoned for unpaid rent".
        
               | ty6853 wrote:
               | I'll be honest, I have not seen a single _implemented_
               | legal system I would like to live under, although that 's
               | not to dismiss all systems as equally bad. I was
               | imprisoned in the USA once because an officer claimed a
               | dog alerted, resulted in being stripped naked and cavity
               | searched -- but that doesn't mean the entirety of our
               | justice system is bad. Which isn't implied to be as bad
               | as, say, a rapist getting away with it via a forced
               | marriage as might happen under Shariah or xeer law.
        
           | coredog64 wrote:
           | You're missing a function: Removal. Locking up criminals
           | prevents them committing additional crimes that impact the
           | general public. Data from the last few years shows that
           | there's definitely a Pareto aspect to criminal populations,
           | and absent an ability to rehabilitate, removal is the next
           | best option for society at large.
        
             | lo_zamoyski wrote:
             | I would argue that removal can be analyzed into the other
             | categories, or into something that isn't the province of
             | punishment.
             | 
             | 1. the deprivation of freedom is _retributive_
             | 
             | 2. the prevention of additional crimes can be said to be
             | _deterrence_ of an active sort
             | 
             | 3. the protection of society isn't part of punishment per
             | se, but a _separate end_
             | 
             | This becomes clear when we consider imprisonment in
             | relation to various crimes. Violent criminals are
             | imprisoned in part because they are a threat to the
             | physical safety of others. However, is an embezzler or a
             | mayor embroiled in shady accounting a threat to anyone's
             | physical safety? Probably not. So the purpose of their
             | removal is less about crime prevention and more about
             | retribution.
        
               | BlarfMcFlarf wrote:
               | The idea is that if they are making a rational choice to
               | embezzle or not (and have other viable options for
               | living), then knowing jail time is a possible outcome
               | changes the expected payout equation. In that way it can
               | be preventative, but only in those specific sorts of
               | cases.
        
             | jmpetroske wrote:
             | Would love to read into this research if you have a link or
             | something to search
        
           | HappMacDonald wrote:
           | > Punishment has three ends: retribution, rehabilitation, and
           | deterrence.
           | 
           | One might argue a fourth end as well: removal.
           | 
           | When people talk about "cleaning up the streets" they don't
           | mean causing ruffians to clean up their act, what they refer
           | to is removing the ruffians entirely. To "someplace else". To
           | "Not in my backyard". Out of sight, out of mind as is often
           | said.
           | 
           | For profit prisons may view prisoners as cheap labor or levy
           | bait, but for the voting public who gets no cut of that
           | action the real inducement starts and ends with "make the
           | problem go away". Sweep human beings we do not know how to
           | cohabitate with under a rug.
           | 
           | Retribution may appeal to those directly wronged, or to the
           | minority of sadists in a population. Deterrence is oft
           | admired, but few honestly believe it's really possible given
           | that harsh sentences never seem to cause crime to go to zero
           | (sensationalism-driven media that magnifies every mole-hill
           | notwithstanding) and that repeat offenses outnumber first
           | offenses. Rehabilitation appeals to those with compassion,
           | though nobody has a clear bead on how to actually land that
           | plane with more than the lowest hanging fruit of only-
           | slightly-off-course offenders.
           | 
           | So I think the real elephant in the room is that people
           | want/demand/rely upon removal.
        
             | Ray20 wrote:
             | >harsh sentences never seem to cause crime to go to zero
             | 
             | Harsh sentences work great when used with the inevitability
             | of punishment. It is obvious that a harsh sentence does not
             | discourage a criminal to commit a crime if they expect to
             | avoid any responsibility
        
           | nlitened wrote:
           | I think there's also a fourth "end" to prison punishment, but
           | I don't know the proper name for it.
           | 
           | It's when you remove the dangerous person from a society for
           | a while, so they can't commit crimes for that while. This is
           | very important part of prison punishment with people with
           | criminal tendencies, and this is why recidivists get longer
           | prison sentences for each subsequent repetition of a similar
           | crime.
           | 
           | Unfortunately we have to admit that some (small) percentage
           | of criminals cannot be rehabilitated, so they must be
           | isolated from society.
        
             | ChadNauseam wrote:
             | The technical term is incapacitation. (Other commenters in
             | this thread are also referring to it as "removal".)
             | 
             | For criminals that act alone, variations in the severity of
             | the sentence doesn't seem to have the impact you might
             | expect it to have on how much it actually deters people.
             | (And there is the issue that people in prison can share
             | strategies between themselves for how to more effectively
             | commit crime, which is not an ideal outcome.) So indeed,
             | incapacitation is a very important factor. When it's
             | studied, you often see numbers like "increasing the
             | sentence by 10 years prevents 0.2 crimes due to deterrence
             | and 0.9 crimes due to incapacitation".
             | 
             | I say this applies to people acting alone because, although
             | I have no proof, I suspect that organized crime is a bit
             | more "rational" in their response to changes in sentencing.
             | If sentencing were set up so that engaging in a category of
             | crime was not profitable for the criminal organization, I'm
             | pretty sure they would realize this and stop. This logic
             | doesn't apply to individual people, because the average
             | person committing a crime has no idea what the sentence is
             | or their odds of getting caught, and they obviously don't
             | do it often enough that the random variation is amortized
             | out.
        
         | dfxm12 wrote:
         | Do participants get paid a _real_ wage?
        
           | glommer wrote:
           | Preston was free to negotiate his pay with us, and we pay him
           | a full salary. Just no health care benefits.
        
             | dgacmu wrote:
             | Does he actually get the salary, or does the prison take
             | huge overhead?
        
               | glommer wrote:
               | they take an (actually very reasonable) cut, but he is
               | free to take his salary.
        
               | kgwxd wrote:
               | No cut is reasonable.
        
               | jjmarr wrote:
               | They need money to pay for oversight. Any time prisoners
               | talk to someone on the outside, it's a potential conduit
               | for contraband or organized crime.
        
               | Balinares wrote:
               | The exact same is true of people working outside of
               | prison.
        
               | gbalduzzi wrote:
               | I think it's reasonable to assume an additional risk for
               | people in prison.
               | 
               | Even though the enrolled people are completely
               | trustworthy, doing this prevents untrustworthy people to
               | simulate interest in the program just to be able to
               | contact the external world for illegal activities.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | Not really, contraband includes many things that are
               | completely legal for non prisoners to have like currency,
               | phones, knives, or alcohol. Sending that stuff to
               | prisoners is illegal
               | https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1791
               | 
               | List of prohibited items: https://www.law.cornell.edu/def
               | initions/uscode.php?width=840...
        
               | snickerdoodle12 wrote:
               | You can send phones, knives or alcohol via email or
               | slack?
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | You can agree to pay for them at a given prices via email
               | or slack. It's more or less guaranteed that contraband
               | will get into prisons if someone is willing to pay for
               | it. Thus the rules around no cash or phones for
               | prisoners.
               | 
               | Inmates are treated very differently by the legal system
               | than regular people. Thirteenth Amendment: "Neither
               | slavery nor involuntary servitude, _except as a
               | punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been
               | duly convicted,_ shall exist within the United States"
        
               | snickerdoodle12 wrote:
               | You can also do that via a butt phone, which are
               | everywhere.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | That heavily depends on the facility. Phones aren't that
               | difficult to track down as a radio device, but such
               | efforts are rare.
        
               | newswasboring wrote:
               | People working outside pay rent. From a third to upto
               | half their salary.
        
               | hashstring wrote:
               | Why would it not be reasonable?
        
               | hildolfr wrote:
               | Google feeds staff members and provides rest areas , why
               | are they paid?
        
               | Ray20 wrote:
               | For not going to work for competitors.
        
               | borski wrote:
               | The government takes a cut then too, both from the
               | employer and employer, in the form of taxes.
        
               | kgwxd wrote:
               | Which should be paying for the prisons and the operations
               | society approves of to reform inmates. Prisons should not
               | be a businesses of any kind.
        
               | hashstring wrote:
               | I agree that a prison should not be a business (aka a
               | different model than the US-model). I also think that
               | many prisoners are currently treated unfairly.
               | 
               | However, ideally, I don't think that it makes sense for
               | someone to go to prison, which costs tax money, and
               | meanwhile earn the same amount of money by remote working
               | from prison as someone in the outside world, who actually
               | has living expenses to pay for (which get taxed also).
               | 
               | So, I think, when it comes to fairness, it wouldn't be
               | unreasonable if a partial cut goes to the TCOO of holding
               | that prisoner.
               | 
               | Now again, American prisons have their whole incentive
               | model messed up, so I don't even want to get in an
               | argument about America's implementation of this system
               | and how it would lead to more problems-- because it's
               | well-known and more than expected.
        
               | Reasoning wrote:
               | If my employer payed for my housing and food I would not
               | consider it unreasonable that my paycheck reflected that.
               | 
               | > Why are they paid
               | 
               | Because people have expenses other than food and lodging.
               | Prisoners do to, some save money for after they leave
               | prison others spend it at the commissary.
        
               | esteth wrote:
               | Presumably the prison is providing the "office" where the
               | person works from, the Internet connection, etc.
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | Also food and accomodation ..
        
               | snickerdoodle12 wrote:
               | 1) How is this different from any other prisoner
               | 
               | 2) They wouldn't have to if they didn't insist on locking
               | him up
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | It isn't different from any other prisoner. In many
               | states you leave prison owing them back rent. Maine at
               | least charges as a percentage of the prisoners income,
               | rather than having them build debt.
               | 
               | https://www.npr.org/2022/03/04/1084452251/the-vast-
               | majority-...
               | 
               | Maine: https://www.corrections1.com/finance-and-
               | budgets/maine-lawma... "the state can deduct up to 20% of
               | their income -- 10% for room and board, which is sent to
               | the state's general fund, not the Department of
               | Corrections , and up to 10% to cover transportation
               | provided by the department. Since 2020, the state fund
               | has collected a total of $2.4 million.
        
               | bryanrasmussen wrote:
               | "No cut" is reasonable, but also "Some cut" is
               | reasonable. However while arguing that "no cut" should be
               | mandatory is reasonable, given that "no cut" would itself
               | be reasonable, it is probably not pragmatic. Therefore in
               | order to best support this kind of thing one should
               | determine exactly how much "some cut" should be.
        
               | osigurdson wrote:
               | Isn't this largely just a one off situation that happened
               | to work out? I doubt there will be legions of prisoners
               | working remotely. If that future did come to be, it would
               | be rather dystopian imo.
        
               | bryanrasmussen wrote:
               | if, right now, it is not dystopian, then there is no
               | reason to say it would inevitably be dystopian if there
               | were multiple occurrences, although sure, I expect it
               | probably would be considering what the world is like. Of
               | course I am the last person who one would expect to say
               | it but - there is always hope.
        
               | psunavy03 wrote:
               | More dystopian than people in prison not being able to
               | prepare themselves for a life outside?
        
               | mp05 wrote:
               | Don't you suppose that it's "fair" to request
               | compensation for the room and board if the person is
               | making a "fair" wage?
        
               | bokoharambe wrote:
               | Forced room and board?
        
               | Ray20 wrote:
               | And also medical care. Literally socialism.
        
               | oh_fiddlesticks wrote:
               | To be honest, if he didn't pay a cut of his earnings
               | while living off government allocated funds, wouldn't
               | that put him in a better position than those who haven't
               | been found guilty and sentenced for breaking the laws of
               | the land in which they reside? I can't see a much
               | resistance to the argument that they one really ought to
               | pay the full cost back to the state, as with community
               | service... no?
        
               | BlarfMcFlarf wrote:
               | No. Prisons _should_ cost society money. If you are
               | taking away someone's freedoms, there should be a high
               | cost so you don't do it flippantly when another solution
               | will work.
        
               | mp05 wrote:
               | Wow.
               | 
               | No, they forfeited their freedoms and we're put away by
               | due process, but if that's your point of view then we've
               | nothing further to discuss. Incredible stuff on HN these
               | days.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | Incredible for sure. To start with, it sounds like you
               | think due process means that any kind or amount of
               | punishment must be correct and reasonable, which. wow.
        
               | Reasoning wrote:
               | Are you concerned that if you make prison too expensive
               | society might resort to capital punishment to reduce
               | prison costs? Or we end up releasing prisoners who are
               | legitimate dangers to society.
               | 
               | And to be clear, I'm opposed to capital punishment and
               | dangerous conditions in prisons. I'm just pointing out
               | that I don't think your argument is very good. If you
               | think we as a society are willing to flippantly put
               | people in prison because it's cheap I don't see how you
               | can trust us to no resort to other flippant measures if
               | the cost was high.
        
               | BobaFloutist wrote:
               | No, because they don't want to be there.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | I disagree. The cut should support the program itself and
               | then further offset taxpayer expenses related to housing,
               | feeding, and caring for the prisoner. I could even see a
               | case for taking it as a way of ensuring it was saved and
               | returned at release.
        
               | franga2000 wrote:
               | Fuck no! Lowering the cost of keeping people in prison
               | would make it even easier for the government to lock
               | people up for smaller crimes and with bigger sentences.
               | It's even worse with the privatised prison system that
               | the US has. They already know the "market price" (what
               | the government is willing to spend) so adding "free
               | money" into the equation just makes it easier for them to
               | raise prices and end up pocketing even more money than
               | they already do.
               | 
               | Framing it as offsetting the cost would also make it very
               | easy to increase the cut, bit by bit, until it gets to a
               | truly unreasonable level. And since the person is already
               | in prison and we have to pay for them no matter what, why
               | would they choose to work if the deal is so bad?
        
               | dfxm12 wrote:
               | _It 's even worse with the privatised prison system that
               | the US has. _
               | 
               | This is a state by state thing. FWIW in this case, ME
               | doesn't have private prisons. I don't bring this up to
               | imply everything related to their cut is on the up and
               | up, however, I believe Maine is very much incentivized to
               | make this a useful program in terms of keeping people
               | from returning to jail (as opposed to squeezing every
               | dollar from the prisoners).
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | Fix the problem then, don't perpetuate it. If you think
               | the problem is corrupt and profiteering prisons that will
               | turn to this type of shenanigans, there's a bigger
               | problem to fix.
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | Huh? Universities take a 60% overhead in some scenarios.
               | 
               | The dude is is prison, slave like conditions are
               | ridiculous, but there should be a healthy overhead.
        
               | tartoran wrote:
               | Even in the case he doesn't, it's still an amazing
               | opportunity to learn that would lead to a better future
               | for sure.
        
               | cooperaustinj wrote:
               | Why not just pay them in exposure? I hope you can think
               | about why the proposal in your reply is problematic.
        
             | gadders wrote:
             | Sounds fair, and it sounds like an excellent programme. I
             | hope the developer's life continues on this new trajectory.
        
         | antihero wrote:
         | It's amazing. Absolutely insane that people are incarcerated so
         | long for non-violent drug crimes, though.
         | 
         | Turso also looks really neat for small Payload sites.
        
           | CobrastanJorji wrote:
           | Oh absolutely. Voters always favor harsher punishments or
           | making things worse for those already convicted of crimes.
           | You never get any more votes by pushing for lower punishments
           | for any crime or by doing anything to reduce recidivism. I
           | suspect that a pretty solid litmus test for "politician who
           | is actually trying to make the world a better place" based
           | just on how they vote for lowering recidivism.
        
           | tptacek wrote:
           | I agree with you. This is a crazy high sentence (15-30). But
           | worth nothing that the fact pattern behind it was also pretty
           | crazy.
        
           | badc0ffee wrote:
           | "Non-violent drug crimes" brings to mind hippies selling weed
           | or mushrooms. But this guy was selling carfentanil. I'm not
           | saying he's to blame for the opioid crisis turning street
           | people into shambling zombies, clogging emergency services
           | with overdoses, and causing death, but he certainly played a
           | part.
        
             | cortesoft wrote:
             | He played a lot smaller part than the Sackler family, who
             | ran Purdue Pharma and pushed their drugs into communities.
             | They killed a lot more people than this guy, and yet none
             | of them are in jail.
        
               | tux3 wrote:
               | The Sacklers are comfortably above the law and that's a
               | bad thing, but that doesn't make small time carfentanyl
               | operations any less bad
               | 
               | Evil is a threshold, it's not a competition with limited
               | spots
               | 
               | Sometimes big crime families or notorious serial killers
               | get away with it, but it doesn't lower the threshold for
               | anyone else
               | 
               | It doesn't make it any better that someone else is doing
               | even worse. You don't get to do a little crime, as a
               | treat
        
               | cess11 wrote:
               | "You don't get to do a little crime, as a treat"
               | 
               | Why not? I much prefer a society in which I can get away
               | with some crimes to one where every crime is prosecuted.
        
               | rangestransform wrote:
               | Discretionary enforcement is just used as a way to
               | disguise discrimination
               | 
               | Perhaps our laws would be fairer and simpler if
               | enforcement were draconian and uniform
        
               | theoreticalmal wrote:
               | Very interesting spectrum you're suggesting
        
               | badc0ffee wrote:
               | The Singapore way
        
               | dfxm12 wrote:
               | Focus on the bad thing, not piling on the guy who is
               | serving his sentence (while also making a new life for
               | himself).
        
               | rafaelmn wrote:
               | I wouldn't say he's piling on him, just replying to the
               | guy aboowho made it sound like this guy is in jail for
               | smoking weed.
        
               | ipaddr wrote:
               | A few years ago they would have been in jail. Pick the
               | wrong state you still could end up in jail.
               | 
               | Punishing is always a recipe for they punishment going
               | back to society
        
               | ipaddr wrote:
               | Evil is a religious concept.
               | 
               | Selling drugs isn't evil. Not selling drug doesn't make
               | you good. People take drugs for various reasons. If a
               | doctor sells them they are good but if someone else sells
               | them they are evil?
               | 
               | The person buying could have been fired and can't afford
               | Doctors prescription so the person selling could be an
               | angel.
        
               | e40 wrote:
               | A doctor that over-prescribes them would be arrested,
               | too. Or one that prescribed it to someone for a non-
               | medical reason. (There are many of those latter docs.)
               | 
               | People that sell fentanyl (or similar) are very bad for
               | society, to avoid the triggering "evil". Look how many
               | people have died in the last 10 years. It's insane.
               | 
               | EDIT: I personally know a young man that died from a fent
               | overdose and it's likely he didn't know what he took had
               | fent in it. 22 years old and the whole world ahead him.
               | Completely destroyed his family.
        
               | cortesoft wrote:
               | > Evil is a threshold, it's not a competition with
               | limited spots
               | 
               | No, but our enforcement has limited resources. We can't
               | arrest and jail every offender of every crime, so we pick
               | and choose where to spend our enforcement resources. All
               | the money spent pursuing, arresting, trying, and
               | imprisoning this guy could have been spent going after
               | people like the Sacklers.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | Bush and his cronies resulted in the death of far more
               | innocent people than your typical murderer. But we don't
               | stop sending murderers to prison just because Bush/Cheney
               | are not in prison.
               | 
               | I've voted for drug legalization (including possession).
               | However, that doesn't mean that I condone all drug
               | dealing behavior.
        
               | e40 wrote:
               | Whataboutism. Selling the drug he was peddling kills
               | people. Lots of people. This is not a "no victims" crime.
               | 
               | EDIT: another commentor found that it was MDMA and weed,
               | so this discussion is purely theoretical and doesn't
               | apply to OP.
        
               | Reasoning wrote:
               | MDMA and weed was his initial sentence. He's in prison
               | now for selling synthetic opioids.
        
               | nkrisc wrote:
               | Yes, they should be in jail for longer than he is.
        
             | swdev281634 wrote:
             | > But this guy was selling carfentanil
             | 
             | Do you have a source? It seems that guy was selling MDMA
             | and marijuana. Here's the relevant quote from
             | https://pthorpe92.dev/intro/my-story/
             | 
             |  _I was caught with MDMA coming in the mail from Vancouver,
             | and some marijuana coming from california (the latter of
             | which is what I am currently serving my time for right
             | now)_
        
               | badc0ffee wrote:
               | From elsewhere in the thread:
               | 
               | * https://apnews.com/general-
               | news-d68dca63e95946fbb9cc82f38540...
               | 
               | * https://www.doj.nh.gov/news-and-media/preston-thorpe-
               | sentenc...
        
               | gpm wrote:
               | Gluing a few stories together (links included below where
               | I'm not citing to your link) it seems like:
               | 
               | ~2012 he was caught selling MDMA and marijuana, and went
               | to prison
               | 
               | ~end or 2015 or start of 2016 he was released on
               | probation
               | 
               | [Edit: Added entry] December 2016 police responding to a
               | domestic violence call enter his apartment to make
               | contact with the alleged victim, and discover U-47700 (a
               | synthetic opioid) https://www.courts.nh.gov/sites/g/files
               | /ehbemt471/files/docu...
               | 
               | April 2017 the police find traces of carfentanil while
               | executing a search warrant at his place - plausibly but
               | not provably linked to some recent carfentanil deaths -
               | and police announce they are searching for him.
               | https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/man-wanted-suspected-
               | let...
               | 
               | May 2017 he ends up back in prison.
               | 
               | Aug 2017 he pleads guilty to possession of U47700 (a
               | synthetic opioid) with intent to distribute
               | https://www.wmur.com/article/defense-plans-appeal-of-
               | search-...
               | 
               | Oct 2017 he's sentenced to 15-30 years on the above
               | charge, he has not been charged with possessing the
               | carfentanil (yet) despite the apparent evidence
               | https://www.wmur.com/article/man-facing-carfentanil-
               | charge-r...
               | 
               | The articles aren't clear on this, but given his own
               | recounting I assume that a suspended sentence for
               | Marijuana was un-suspended as a result of the new charges
               | and he is serving that sentence first, or concurrently.
        
               | croemer wrote:
               | Or he's downplaying the seriousness of the crime. Thanks
               | for digging!
        
             | refulgentis wrote:
             | I find it somewhat amusing that I woke up to this post at
             | ~9 AM, and was surprised at the crowding-out of discussion
             | about the article, by people sort of half-groping at a
             | straw or two they picked up, trying to make a definitive
             | case on his...goodness? morality?...based off the straw
             | they're holding.
             | 
             | It is now 4 PM, about to clock out for the day because I
             | gotta wait for CI run thats >30m. I come back here and it's
             | still going on. This is #3 comment I see when I open HN,
             | ensuing thread takes up two pages scrolls on 16" MBP.
             | 
             | It's bad of me to write this because, well, who cares?
             | Additionally, am I trying to litigate what other people
             | comment?
             | 
             | The root feeling driving me to express myself is a form of
             | frustrated boredom -- rolling with that and verbalizing
             | concretely, a bunch of people writing comments with the one
             | thing they're hyperfocusing on their record to drive a
             | conclusion on their value as a person/morality, and then
             | people pointing out that's not some moral absolute, asking
             | for links, discussing the links...
             | 
             | ...well, it's all just clutter.
             | 
             | Or YouTube comment-level discussion, unless we're planning
             | on relitigating every case he's been involved in.
             | 
             | This all would be better if it the kangaroo court stuff was
             | confined to a thread with _all_ of the evidence against
             | him, so we didn 't have a bunch of weak cases, or if people
             | didn't treat this as an opportunity to be a drive by judge.
             | Article def. ain't about his crimes, and he ain't saying
             | he's innocent or an angel.
             | 
             | (and the idea that "drug crimes" implies "hippie selling
             | weed or psychedelics" so calling them "drug crimes" is
             | hiding the ball...where does that come from? Its especially
             | dissonant b/c you indicate the mere fact he sold an opiod
             | is so bad that this guy is...bad? irredeemable? not worth
             | discussing?...so presumably you care a lot about opiods, so
             | presumably you know that's whats driven drug crime the
             | last, uh, decade or two?)
        
               | badc0ffee wrote:
               | > trying to make a definitive case on his...goodness?
               | morality?
               | 
               | Speaking for myself, I'm actually just discussing the
               | idea that a non-violent crime like drug dealing
               | necessarily deserves a light sentence in general.
               | 
               | > Sounds like a you thing
               | 
               | It is a me thing. That's why I said "brings to mind".
               | 
               | I'm a product of my time. I remember when weed and
               | psychedelics meant demonization and heavy sentences, and
               | it was absurd because those substances aren't that
               | dangerous.
               | 
               | This is the context in which I'm accustomed to calling
               | drug dealing a "non-violent crime". So, I feel like I
               | need to point out that things are not quite the same with
               | deadly drugs like carfentanil.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | They are largely the same though. Small-time dealing of
               | any drug is often just being the guy in your circle of
               | users that does the group buying, maybe it was just your
               | turn. Or your dealer says you can pay for your purchase
               | by driving this package across town. Now you've been
               | caught with enough pills to kill 30 people and the intent
               | to distribute - is that an action that hits your
               | threshold for heavy sentences and bad people?
        
           | ahahs wrote:
           | Say that to the people he killed selling those drugs. This
           | isn't weed, it's highly lethal pills.
        
             | OvidNaso wrote:
             | If he killed anyone he should be charged with murder or
             | manslaughter.
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | Many dealers and addicts who are involved in extremely
               | violent crimes are plead down to drug crimes after having
               | been charged with both drug and violent crimes.
               | 
               | https://www.courts.nh.gov/sites/g/files/ehbemt471/files/d
               | ocu...
               | 
               | > _" On December 24, 2016, three Manchester police
               | officers responded to an apartment following a report of
               | a domestic dispute. The report was made by the mother of
               | Ashley Arbogast, who advised that her daughter had called
               | her Stating that her boyfriend had broken her arm during
               | an argument."_
        
               | BobaFloutist wrote:
               | Ok, but we should punish people for the crimes they're
               | convicted of, not the crimes we've decided for ourselves
               | they committed.
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | He is being punished for what he was convicted of;
               | whether you agree with the penalty or not. If we do
               | change the penalties, the convictions will change too.
               | 
               | I just wanted to point out that there is clear evidence
               | that this individual was involved in at least one violent
               | act, as is often the case with 'non-violent drug
               | convicts'.
        
             | ipaddr wrote:
             | Any yet there are coke-cola machines everywhere including
             | inside police stations which kills more people each year.
             | 
             | And only one company is allowed to import the specific
             | leaves/material (coca leafs). The government restricts
             | everyone from importing them unless it's one of the biggest
             | companies in the world.
        
               | genewitch wrote:
               | McDonalds had a location inside the hospital in my metro
               | area. For at least decades, they finally left that
               | location during covid, sometime.
               | 
               | i can't even, and it sounds made up.
        
         | trod1234 wrote:
         | One of the biggest problems with the prison system in the US is
         | that prisoners are often saddled with the debt related to or
         | imposed on them by their incarceration which they can't pay
         | back.
         | 
         | The inability to find a job coupled with the crushing interest
         | is what leads to desperation, and then repeat criminal
         | behavior.
         | 
         | > There is a real risk of exploitation
         | 
         | Centralized systems always have a risk of corruption when power
         | is concentrated in few people. Those job roles also many times
         | attract the corrupt; and even when you have people who go in
         | with a good moral caliber, the regular dynamics of the
         | interactions may also twist them into being corrupt.
         | 
         | Its a rare person with sufficient moral caliber that can
         | survive such a job (as a guard or other prison staff) unscathed
         | and still be a good person afterwards.
         | 
         | Many avenues of education also do not prepare them
         | appropriately for work in the private sector, and some careers
         | are simply prohibited. For example becoming a chemist or
         | engineer when they have a conviction related to ethics
         | violations in such fields.
        
         | larodi wrote:
         | Wonder if they acquire the skills to break into systems, why
         | would they choose not to do it in this crazy world out there?
         | Particularly if somebody spends long time, or has spent so far.
        
         | _DeadFred_ wrote:
         | How do they make sure the prison isn't just employing people
         | already experienced in the field to make the prison money? How
         | do they ensure people are treated fairly (normally prisoners
         | aren't really even allowed sick days, they can't chose not to
         | work overtime if required, etc)? Do they audit to ensure number
         | of sick hours are comparable to non-prison work? Do they ensure
         | prison guards bonus' aren't based on inmate performance (UNICOR
         | does all of the above bad practices resulting in sick people
         | being forced to work overtime in order to get the guards their
         | bonus)?
         | 
         | UNICOR/the Federal system 'strongly encourages' people with CAD
         | experience, etc do the McDonalds remodel contracts, the World
         | Trade Center work, etc. These are people that worked in the
         | industry prior to prison and that are not traditionally been
         | hired back after release, so it's simply being used to make
         | UNICOR money on big contracts based on incarcerated individuals
         | pre-existing training being exploited. In addition having
         | structural CAD work done by people with zero say in their job,
         | their deliverables/quality, their hours, etc seems like a bad
         | idea. I don't know why outside engineers are using this work.
         | The UNICOR McDonalds remodels are probably fine (though you can
         | tell by the current feel of McDonalds that the remodels were
         | literally done by prison inmates), but the UNICOR World Trade
         | Center stuff seems super sketchy.
        
         | philjohn wrote:
         | Yep - turns out the Nordic countries had it right all along.
         | When you focus on rehabilitation and not just punishment you
         | get lower redicivism rates. Who would have thought it?
        
           | gabeio wrote:
           | > When you focus on rehabilitation and not just punishment
           | 
           | From a book I recently read on the subject they seem not just
           | to focus on rehab and lack of punishment. If there are
           | disputes with others within the facilities the ones in the
           | dispute must sit down and talk through their issues and find
           | a resolution. This helps ingrain proper anger management &
           | helps re-acclimate them to normal society where violence is
           | rarely the best option. And it makes a ton of sense, if they
           | never are taught how to talk out their issues they will go
           | back to how they have handled those issues all along.
        
             | philjohn wrote:
             | To be honest, that could certainly be filed under
             | "rehabilitation". Giving people the skills they need to be
             | productive members of society is definitely in that
             | wheelhouse.
        
             | koolba wrote:
             | I would bet a mostly homogeneous population contributes to
             | this.
        
               | kurikuri wrote:
               | They were likely in a homogeneous population when they
               | committed the crime that got them there in the first
               | place, so that confounder might not matter much at all.
        
       | skeptrune wrote:
       | Extremely hopeful that more prison systems adopt work programs
       | like Maine's
        
       | johnnyApplePRNG wrote:
       | Speaking of incarcerated tech gurus... I've been really liking
       | what Sam Bent [0] has been producing lately.
       | 
       | If you're allowed/able to watch YouTube in American prisons, I
       | would definitely check him out!
       | 
       | [0] https://www.youtube.com/@Sam_Bent/videos
        
       | keepamovin wrote:
       | Reading this, I think it's a crime that this guy is not out on
       | early release. The majority of his sentence was for marijuana,
       | which is now widely decriminalized and in some places legalized.
        
         | BizarroLand wrote:
         | I agree he should be released but using the mail to transport
         | marijuana across state lines is definitely not legalized or
         | decriminalized anywhere.
        
         | bastawhiz wrote:
         | I do not believe this is true. Looking at the record, marijuana
         | is one of a few drugs. The specific incident that led to his
         | current sentence is related to a powerful opioid. This is
         | corroborated by Preston's own personal website.
        
         | badc0ffee wrote:
         | He received a suspended sentence for the marijuana. But then he
         | breached his probation, and there were later charges including
         | one for carfentanil.
        
       | robinhood wrote:
       | I'm so glad this is possible. Kudos to Turso for giving this man
       | a new chance. We often criticize people for past bad behavior,
       | but in many cases (not all, of course), they deserve a second
       | chance in life, since most of us can change.
        
       | studentik wrote:
       | In Soviet Union having prisoners do soft labor was called
       | Sharashka. This scales and creates incentives to have more
       | prisoners doing cheap labor.
        
       | tiffanyh wrote:
       | Very interesting.
       | 
       | I have some basic questions if anyone knows:
       | 
       | a. do all inmates get computer & internet access? (or only some,
       | dependent upon the crime you committed)
       | 
       | b. do the inmates have to pay to use the computer & internet? I
       | ask because I hear commissary is prohibitively expensive in
       | prison.
       | 
       | c. how much time per week do inmate get to use the computer with
       | internet access? (and is that time guaranteed they will get)
       | 
       | d. are there job boards specific to helping inmates find remote
       | friendly jobs that are accepting of incarcerated individuals?
        
         | msarchet wrote:
         | There's a link to a post on his personal blog that explains a
         | lot of this
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | This place is an absolute rarity. Almost zero jails or prisons
         | have any access to the Internet at all. Many of the places I
         | know won't even allow a print-out of any information from the
         | Internet (e.g. Wikipedia, Facebook etc) and won't allow any
         | books about computers for security reasons.
         | 
         | Commissary is generally "gas station" prices in jails and
         | prisons.
         | 
         | Some of the inmates I work with right now have tablets that
         | allow music streaming from a small catalog, but I think it is
         | $3/hour to listen to it.
         | 
         | Obviously the families and friends of the loved are the ones
         | burdened with paying for all of these, unless you can get an
         | in-prison job that pays, e.g. dealing drugs is probably the
         | highest paid, sadly.
        
       | kaboomshebang wrote:
       | Inspirational story. Thanks for sharing :)
        
       | h1fra wrote:
       | Prison is about rehabilitation, anything else is either slavery
       | or poor politics. Very glad to see this blog post!
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | I've got a lot of experience working with prisoners. I've
         | almost never seen any rehabilitative programs of any value at
         | all. Mostly the programs I see are "learn to mop floors."
         | 
         | I just helped someone to complete a year-long paralegal course
         | and qualification while inside. The Illinois prison system has
         | now banned this since (a) it came with the option of facilities
         | awarding a 6 month reduction in the length of a non-violent
         | sentence, (b) required the facility to allow someone to proctor
         | the final exam.
        
       | danscan wrote:
       | Locked up, locked in!
       | 
       | On a serious note, I think inmates should have 24/7 laptop
       | computer access with (at least) limited sessions of internet
       | connectivity.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | The place I was at you weren't even allowed a book about
         | computers, lest you might gain enough knowledge to somehow
         | access a facility computer and hack your way to freedom.
         | 
         | They had a computer lab, but it was only for Mavis Beacon. I
         | found the C# compiler that's hidden away in the Windows
         | directory and started teaching programming on the sly. Luckily
         | one of the nuns at the facility took pity on me and bought _C#
         | Weekend Crash Course_ on Amazon (with the CD) and sneaked it
         | through the security checks for me so I 'd have a good
         | reference to teach from.
        
           | aerostable_slug wrote:
           | For those who might be wondering, facilities/counties/states
           | vary a huge amount on what is and isn't allowed.
           | 
           | In California they teach inmates coding, while in other
           | states all computer-related technical books are banned as
           | security risks. Same with basic electrical work -- Promising
           | People has an interesting VR program for teaching electrical
           | helper skills, but in some correctional systems that would be
           | considered unacceptably risky. Tablet and similar system
           | operators/vendors have to shape the material available to the
           | inmates to suit the local restrictions.
        
       | TechDebtDevin wrote:
       | Crazy to keep seeing PThorpe from Primes Discord on HNs front
       | page. I hope youre doing alright in there.
        
       | treebeard901 wrote:
       | When the Government is so corrupt they can take your ability to
       | work any kind of job away from you without even arresting you for
       | anything, having employment from prison is a real achievement.
        
       | josh_carterPDX wrote:
       | This needs to be a model for other states to follow. Too often,
       | incarcerated people are left with very few real options to have a
       | viable career beyond some sort of physical trade like
       | construction, hospitality, or food service. And while all of
       | those career options are great, they do not often provide a real
       | living wage.
       | 
       | Hopefully, we see more of this throughout the country!
        
       | itpragmatik wrote:
       | Fantastic accomplishment, Preston! Wish you good luck and the
       | very best ahead!
        
       | jamesblonde wrote:
       | The scary thing is that Maine is considered progressive for
       | prison.
       | 
       | My former (brilliant) student developed schizophrenia and tried
       | to rob a bank with a gun because the voices told him to do it. He
       | got 10 years in jail. I think every EU country would treat him
       | for his condition until he was safe to rejoin society. In the US,
       | he was thrown in the slammer.
       | 
       | https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irishman-jailed-for-10-years...
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | > I think every EU country would treat him for his condition
         | until he was safe to rejoin society. In the US, he was thrown
         | in the slammer.
         | 
         | From the article, his parents express frustration at their
         | inability to get him committed for treatment in Ireland. They
         | cite the lack of response there as a key factor in his spiral.
         | 
         | Also, the US facility he was sent to _did_ offer psychiatric
         | treatment and the judge urged him to accept it:
         | 
         | > The judge recommended that Clarke serve his sentence at a
         | prison that would give him access to psychiatric treatment and
         | he urged Clarke to accept it.
         | 
         | I understand your objections to the "slammer" but the sentence
         | was actually as lenient as could be, offered the psychiatric
         | treatment he needed, and had an opportunity for him to return
         | to Ireland in a couple years:
         | 
         | > Speaking on behalf of the Clarke family, solicitor Eugene
         | O'Kelly said that they were relieved at the relative leniency
         | of the sentence and expressed the hope Clarke could be returned
         | to Ireland "within a year or two" to serve out his sentence.
        
           | sealeck wrote:
           | Not everyone is capable of reading an article :)
        
           | jamesblonde wrote:
           | Why do you call it a facility?
           | 
           | Do i need to explain the difference between treatment at a
           | pyschiatric center vs the offer of psychiatric treatment in a
           | prison?
           | 
           | If you think they are somehow equivalent, you are very much
           | mistaken.
           | 
           | You are putting somebody with pyschiatric illness in with
           | hardened criminals. Do they welcome him with open arms?
        
         | keybored wrote:
         | > My former (brilliant) student developed schizophrenia and
         | tried to rob a bank with a gun because the voices told him to
         | do it. He got 10 years in jail. I think every EU country would
         | treat him for his condition until he was safe to rejoin
         | society. In the US, he was thrown in the slammer.
         | 
         | Is the story supposed to be more sympathetic because he was
         | (brilliant)?
        
           | jamesblonde wrote:
           | Putting brilliant in parentheses indicates that it is
           | parenthetical. That means it's an aside, an afterthought, or
           | additional information that isn't essential to the main point
           | of the sentence.
           | 
           | What is your point?
        
       | croemer wrote:
       | Great story, I wish this inspired more prisons around the world
       | to follow suit.
       | 
       | For those who don't want to hit Google, the conviction was for
       | possessing 30g of a synthetic opioid "U-47700". A normal dose is
       | ~1mg, 10mg can be deadly (so this was 30000 trips or killing
       | 3000).
       | 
       | The drug became illegal across the US on November 14, 2016.
       | 
       | "Police said they found the drug in Thorpe's apartment in
       | Manchester in December 2016" (https://apnews.com/general-
       | news-d68dca63e95946fbb9cc82f38540...)
       | 
       | "Preston Thorpe, age 25, was sentenced by the Hillsborough County
       | Superior Court (Northern District) to 15 to 30 years stand
       | committed in the New Hampshire State Prison for possession of the
       | controlled drug
       | 3,4-dicholo-N-[2-(dimethylamino)-cyclohexyl]-N-methylbenzamide
       | (also known as "U-47700") with the intent to distribute. U-47700
       | is a synthetic opioid that is classified as a Schedule I drug."
       | (https://www.doj.nh.gov/news-and-media/preston-thorpe-sentenc...)
        
         | TulliusCicero wrote:
         | Wow, 15-30 years seems like an insane amount of time for drug
         | possession. Even if the amount implied dealing, that still
         | seems really high. Don't people typically get less than that
         | for sexual assault or armed robbery?
        
           | brabel wrote:
           | In Northern Europe you get less than that for murder.
        
             | pookha wrote:
             | Unlikely...He's an incredibly callous individual that was
             | cutting drugs with a substance orders of magnitude more
             | dangerous than fentanyl so he could drive an Audi and live
             | the high life. Given that they tied several deaths back to
             | his operation, and that it was a multi-state joint effort,
             | I doubt he'd get a slap on the wrist by a European judges.
        
               | glommer wrote:
               | was an incredibly callous individual.
        
               | rqmedes wrote:
               | Agreed $&@!& him, and any company hires him
        
           | zaphar wrote:
           | I don't know. If you are in posession of enough of a
           | controlled substance to kill 300 people I'm kind of okay with
           | a drastic response. For every Preston Thorpe who turns their
           | life around there 100s of others who will just go out and
           | keep endangering lives like this. I think this is a nuanced
           | topic and 10-30 years is too much for drug possession is
           | entirely lacking the necessary nuance to evaluate. Comparison
           | to other crimes is not particularly useful either without
           | going into the relative harms of each as compared to the
           | harms of the other.
        
             | stickfigure wrote:
             | "enough of a controlled substance to kill" is an absurd,
             | inflammatory metric. They guy was selling a good to willing
             | and aware buyers and we have no reason to believe he was
             | trying to kill anyone.
             | 
             | He shouldn't be in prison, period.
        
               | zurfer wrote:
               | Drug dealers should face prison time. They know that they
               | are breaking the law and potentially ruining lifes for
               | their own profit.
        
               | simulator5g wrote:
               | I really doubt he told the buyers this was synthetic BS,
               | more likely he lied to all his customers about the
               | substance and thus could have killed them due to mis-
               | dosing...
        
               | Aurornis wrote:
               | > They guy was selling a good to willing and aware buyers
               | 
               | In general, high-potency opioids are cut (diluted) with
               | other powders and then sold as a different product to
               | unsuspecting buyers.
               | 
               | Most fentanyl overdoses are from people who thought they
               | were consuming a different, more familiar opioid.
               | Fentanyl and other synthetic opioids like this one are
               | preferred by drug dealers because it's much easier to
               | smuggle a tiny amount of powder and cut it 1000X than to
               | smuggle the real product.
               | 
               | It's nearly impossible for amateurs to properly dilute a
               | powder like this, so the end product has a lot of "hot
               | spots" that lead to overdose.
        
               | Hamuko wrote:
               | > _They guy was selling a good to willing and aware
               | buyers_
               | 
               | How do you know that they were both willing and aware?
               | Just how aware is your average drug buyer on what they're
               | buying and how upfront your average drug seller on what
               | they're selling?
        
               | skeeter2020 wrote:
               | >> to willing and aware buyers
               | 
               | This part is really debatable, based on what we're seeing
               | with overdoses. The dealers (probably) know what they're
               | selling but I'm not sure the buyers do, which even for a
               | legal good would be a crime.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > They guy was selling a good to willing and aware buyers
               | and we have no reason to believe he was trying to kill
               | anyone.
               | 
               | People have already addressed the "aware" part, but
               | "willing"? Really? Do you understand how addiction works?
               | 
               | I'd bet a lot of money that they saved some number of
               | lives by catching him. He was engaging in an activity
               | that had a high probability of resulting in some deaths.
               | I can sell knives in a store, and I have a reasonable
               | level of confidence that no one died because of those
               | knives. Here, the probabilities are inverted.
        
             | conductr wrote:
             | How many deadly chemicals are in an average home? Every
             | time I fill up my car with gas, I buy enough to commit
             | dozens of cases of arson.
             | 
             | Intent matters and there's no reason to believe he intended
             | to harm anyone. I believe it's a crime and should be a
             | felony but this sentence is a bit extreme in terms of
             | punishment fitting the crime.
        
               | Aurornis wrote:
               | > Every time I fill up my car with gas, I buy enough to
               | commit dozens of cases of arson.
               | 
               | Did you read the link? They also found scales, baggies,
               | and Carfentanil (a more potent version of fentanyl).
               | 
               | Filling your car up with gas doesn't compare. A better
               | analogy would be if you tried to fill up a 10,000 gallon
               | tank of gasoline that you couldn't possibly use yourself,
               | all while having a truck full of matches and explosives,
               | and a map to a building with a big circle around it.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | No evidence this guy was trying to start a massive
               | explosion with a single target. Most evidence is that he
               | was trying to start a lot of tiny fires just like I could
               | with the 20 gallons of gas that's in my tank. Except, not
               | even that because he was just reselling the fuel and the
               | consumer gets to decide how big of a fire they want to
               | create.
               | 
               | Intent to distribute is a huge scam and calculates out to
               | a unjustly long sentence for a lot of minor offenders.
               | I'm not arguing it shouldn't be illegal or even tack on
               | some extra time above just normal possession, but 15-30
               | years is absurd for what this guy did in my opinion.
        
               | Hamuko wrote:
               | Gasoline isn't a controlled substance for one.
        
               | skeeter2020 wrote:
               | the conviction was literally for the intent to
               | distribute; RTFM
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | I read it and I simply don't think intent to distribute
               | should be synonymous with intent to kill. There are
               | violent crimes with actual victims that serve less time
               | than this. This is a mathematical calculation of damage
               | that could have been done in worst possible scenario, no
               | evidence of that scenario playing out at all.
               | 
               | This math of weights and maximum hypothetical carnage
               | produces very unfair sentencing.
        
             | tshaddox wrote:
             | I wonder what the sentencing guidelines are for possession
             | of a firearm with enough ammunition to kill 300 people.
        
             | croemer wrote:
             | 3,000 not 300 if my maths are correct (and lethal dose)
        
             | Muromec wrote:
             | Sell controlled substances in a controlled way and people
             | don't die. It was already figured out, but goes against
             | beliefs of americans, as they can't then blame and jail
             | people and have to instead help.
        
               | bufferoverflow wrote:
               | Decriminalization in Portugal and in Oregon ended up in
               | disasters. Resulted in more drug addicts, more violent
               | crime, more crazy behaviors, more people laying or
               | crawling in the streets.
               | 
               | https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/the-hard-drug-
               | decrimina...
        
           | potato3732842 wrote:
           | Unless you do something so heinous it captivates the public
           | or have a bunch of priors the only crimes that reliably will
           | put you away for that kind of time are ones that the
           | government takes specific offense to. Usually that means
           | ignoring their monopoly on violence but seeing as this guy is
           | behind bars for dealing and not murder I'd bet he just got
           | unlucky and happened to sell the dose that some more equal
           | animal or their relative OD'd on.
        
           | Aurornis wrote:
           | > Wow, 15-30 years seems like an insane amount of time for
           | drug possession.
           | 
           | The sentence was for intent to distribute. It's an extremely
           | potent substance. This would be like discovering someone had
           | 30,000 pills. You can't really argue that it was for personal
           | use at that point. They also found him in possession of
           | carfentanil (a more potent version of fentanyl), scales,
           | baggies, and other products. This looks like a very clear
           | case of someone importing high-potency synthetic opioids to
           | redistribute.
           | 
           | High potency synthetic opioids are a high priority target for
           | law enforcement. These are most often cut (diluted) and then
           | sold to buyers expecting some other opioid product. As you
           | might expect, perfectly diluting a 1mg dose of a powder into
           | a 500mg - 1000mg pill form is extremely hard to do and
           | there's a high risk of "hot spots" forming in certain pills
           | (or sections of a powdered product). This results in a lot of
           | serious overdoses.
           | 
           | It's a severe problem right now. Most fentanyl overdoses are
           | from users who thought they were taking some other drug. They
           | might have even "tested" it before, but missed the hot spots.
        
             | Reasoning wrote:
             | I'll add on, he mentions in his blog that he was making
             | "tens of thousands of dollars a week" selling drugs. He was
             | not a small time dealer and certainly wasn't just buying
             | drugs for himself.
             | 
             | His current sentence also (15-30 years) isn't his first
             | prison sentence. He was released and reoffended which
             | absolutely contributed to the longer sentence.
        
           | skeeter2020 wrote:
           | in addition to the other comments, this was also not his
           | first conviction. They get extremely punative.
        
         | IncandescentGas wrote:
         | Since the top comment seems to be judging the worthiness of
         | this individual to work with databases after prison, for those
         | considering working with or hiring someone with a criminal
         | record, I'd beg you to consider:
         | 
         | You're hiring the person as they are today, long after any
         | punishment, rehabilitation, parold, probation, and personal
         | growth. Not who they were at the time of past actions.
         | 
         | Having your own mini trial, where you sit in judgement over the
         | candidate, from your ignorant position of privilege, using
         | whatever details you can dig up with google may be entertaining
         | for you, but is tells you nothing of what kind of employee they
         | might be. Your mock trial may be especially traumatic to endure
         | for the candidate, because their side of the story is rarely
         | included in any reporting you can dig up. Especially for those
         | unfairly convicted.
         | 
         | With everything going on today, do you really trust our justice
         | system to be fair, especially to someone who is not a wealthy
         | and connected straight white male?
         | 
         | If you're only willing to give people a chance when you judge
         | their offence to be trivial by your own ethics, you're not
         | actually providing second chances for those that need it.
        
           | croemer wrote:
           | I'm not judging anything at all. What part of my comment
           | makes you think I judge the worthiness? I just decided to
           | share what the crime was since OP left it out.
           | 
           | To make it unambiguous I added a prefix: "Great story, I wish
           | this inspired more prisons around the world to follow suit."
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | Your comment doesn't seem applicable to this scenario since
           | this is not about "work with databases after prison" or "long
           | after any punishment, rehabilitation, parold, probation, and
           | personal growth". Even the title says it: "from prison". This
           | individual is actually still undergoing their punishment, not
           | long after it.
        
         | croemer wrote:
         | Turns out TFA lies on his blog:
         | 
         | > and some marijuana coming from california (the latter of
         | which is what I am currently serving my time for right now).
         | (https://pthorpe92.dev/intro/my-story/)
         | 
         | He's downplaying his crime. It wasn't just Marijuana.
        
           | Reasoning wrote:
           | Definitely a manipulative framing on his part. He originally
           | was convicted for MDMA and marijuana, was released on
           | probation and then was convicted for synthetic opioids. He's
           | probably serving time right now for the marijuana for
           | breaking his probation but he's not in prison now because of
           | it.
        
       | ArthurStacks wrote:
       | No doubt there will be plenty of suckers, like the companies
       | involved, who buy all this and don't see it for what it is: A
       | criminal playing people to try to find a way to get his sentence
       | reduced or easier time inside
        
         | bastawhiz wrote:
         | Sorry, but this is a disgusting take. Addiction is well
         | established as an illness. It's outright shameful to suggest
         | that someone who is going through recovery is purely doing it
         | as a grift. What you're suggesting is that we can't trust that
         | rehabilitation is possible or reasonable, which is a deeply
         | cruel prospect.
        
           | ArthurStacks wrote:
           | And I'm sure if you had your way the prisons would be empty
           | of anyone convicted of a drug related crime because 'they and
           | their terribly sad addictions/illnesses are the real victims'
           | 
           | Theyre in prison as a punishment for crimes
        
             | glommer wrote:
             | Preston has never asked for anyone's sympathy or
             | understanding about his past crimes. If you read his stuff,
             | he owns it fully, is incredibly sorry. He's the first to
             | admit that what he did had very real consequences.
        
             | bastawhiz wrote:
             | To what end? To spend tax dollars? To make them rot away
             | indefinitely?
             | 
             | What good are we doing to society if we are keeping
             | rehabilitated individuals locked up at taxpayer expense?
             | There's no objectively correct amount of punishment. The
             | correct amount of punishment _should_ be the smallest
             | amount of time necessary to be confident that the criminal
             | won 't cause more harm to society, especially when the
             | crime was committed as the result of a treatable illness
             | like addiction.
        
           | croemer wrote:
           | Rehabilitation is great. But you might have the wrong idea
           | about the crime.
           | 
           | It wasn't just addiction. He had enough U-47700 for 30,000
           | trips (30 thousand). See
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44291172
        
             | bastawhiz wrote:
             | I'm not disputing that. But someone doesn't simply decide
             | to acquire that much of a very serious drug with a sound
             | mind. Is it fair to treat a crime the same for two people
             | if one person is suffering from schizophrenia and the other
             | is of sound mind?
             | 
             | Simply saying "you did a terrible thing, and that's
             | irredeemable" isn't useful to society. What good are you
             | doing if you've rehabilitated the criminal? You're just
             | spending tax dollars on principle. It's cruel and
             | unproductive.
        
         | rqmedes wrote:
         | 100%
        
       | ConanRus wrote:
       | Prison Architect ITT
        
       | ahahs wrote:
       | I think this guy went to prison and realized how much easier it
       | is to sit down and work instead of dealing drugs.
        
       | jiveturkey wrote:
       | > preferring instead to spend ~15+ hours a day on projects and
       | open source contributions.
       | 
       | This makes it clear it's not just that the prison provides such
       | opportunities, but that inmates are motivated to take advantage
       | of such. Too many fully law abiding folks spend 15+ hours of
       | screen time just doom scrolling.
       | 
       | There's a real lesson here for similar community services. For
       | folks whose upbringing maybe doesn't afford such advantages, if
       | services can be available where students can find reprieve from
       | harsh daily life and be (very) modestly taken care of, I can see
       | value. At a much lesser level, I benefited enormously from
       | school, church, and community services where I could apply
       | myself, things my family could never afford. So, like school
       | lunches but for practical developer education.
        
       | pastage wrote:
       | I have done 90 hours weeks when I was younger, I really hope he
       | manages to get some exercise and down time. It is not healthy to
       | work that much even if it escapism from a worse situation.
        
       | einpoklum wrote:
       | > _I 've spent just under 10 years of my life in Prison (all for
       | non-violent drug crimes.) _
       | 
       | (sigh) another victim of the US obsession with sticking as many
       | people as possible in prison. I wish the regime is overthrown
       | somehow and he can get released.
        
       | djoldman wrote:
       | I fear that the distinctly American emphasis on personal
       | independence and deprioritization of root causes has led to our
       | persistent and failed war on drugs.
       | 
       | Unfortunately, many of the laws written and policies enacted
       | presume an idealistic fantasy where humans are much more
       | rationally acting, thoughtful, and informed than they really are.
       | 
       | The clearest example of this is raising statutory penalties from
       | "many years" to "many many years" in prison. What is this
       | supposed to achieve? Do people think that folks out there:
       | 
       | 1. know the laws well enough to know how many years they'll get
       | for the crime they're about to commit?
       | 
       | 2. (and if knowledgable about penalty changes) think, "oh well I
       | would have done X and risked many years in prison but now that
       | it's many many years, I won't" ?
       | 
       | If huge prison sentences and massive resources spent on crime
       | detection+ enforcement were the answer, America wouldn't have an
       | illegal drug problem.
        
       | ElijahLynn wrote:
       | I definitely cried reading this. Happy tears.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-16 23:00 UTC)