Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Prison Program Aims To Turn Criminals Into Coders

Posted by Soulskill on from the hello-walls dept.

Press2ToContinue writes with news that San Quentin, a notorious California prison, has started a program to teach a class of inmates to write code. The first class will last for six months, and the inmates are learning about programming for eight hours a day. The hope is to give them the skills to find a good job after they leave prison, which in turn would reduce their chances of recidivism. Since the state's Dept. of Corrections prohibits internet access, the class only "pretends" to be online — they can't use internet-based resources, and nobody on the outside can see or use the software they create. One of the class's backers said, 'Almost every week there's epiphanies. And most of the guys in here, they've never touched a computer before. They are progressing beyond our expectations."

45 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. Of course! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's what we need more of! Computer-savvy criminals!

    1. Re:Of course! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Of course! by eth1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?

      You mean the ones that will probably never get hired because of their criminal record?

    3. Re:Of course! by ranton · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?

      ... and won't pass any corporate background checks. I think it is great to teach inmates anything that could help them lead a productive life after prison. But personally I would start with professions where background checks are not common.

      It seems improbable for people with few job skills to come out of prison to get $50k/yr jobs as developers. I would be happier if prisons spent times training inmates for more realistic jobs where they may only make $18/hr, but will actually have a chance of being employed.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    4. Re:Of course! by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They will probably pass a law saying you cannot discriminate against prior convictions or something unless you can demonstrate some need for security that requires it.

      The Governor of Ohio is already trying something similar. He's expanded or trying to expand professional license qualifications to convicts who have been trouble free for an amount of time. He said something about how do you expect recidivism to be low when released prisoners cannot even get jobs they can likely support themselves on. I'm not aware of any specific legislation but I saw him bring it up in a couple speeches.

    5. Re:Of course! by ranton · · Score: 2

      For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?

      The same way I compete with developers with little to no college debt today (median student loan debt is still only around $10k), and who live in the cheap neighborhoods near me instead of the high property value township I live in. By being better than they are.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    6. Re:Of course! by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is only one reason to hire a criminal, and that is planning to do something criminal. That way, if you get caught, you can play innocent and shift the blame on the ex-con because, ya know, once a crook always a crook and all that.

      Else, why hire some ex-con when there's 100s battling to get that job? No, I didn't discriminate against him, that other guy just had better qualifications. Because, uh, I do value that experience he has in ... hell, we'll find some tech in his resume that he did the ex-con didn't!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Of course! by Fnord666 · · Score: 4, Funny

      For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?

      By not having a felony conviction?

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    8. Re:Of course! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not if the government is the one suing, because it's in the interest of society as a whole to make it possible for former criminals to actually be rehabilitated and contribute to the system.

      Considering that 40% of the adult American working-age population have criminal records, many of them for completely stupid and banal offenses, do you really want to make it so impossible for someone to be honest that they have to return to crime just to eat?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    9. Re:Of course! by brian.stinar · · Score: 2

      I don't believe that my education and experience is comparable to that which would be received in prison, which makes me think there wouldn't be much direct competition to me. If anything, something like this would seems (likely to me) to result in the massive, lower skilled end, of tech work being sent to prisons or half-way houses inside the U.S. as opposed to being shipped outside the U.S. This seems like a good thing.

      I've worked on numerous projects that were shipped outside the country, to MUCH cheaper labor rate places. That tends not to work out very well, unless the project is extremely well spec'd, and/or requires very basic skills, and a very strong relationship exists between the buyer and seller. Typically, I become involved when the project has failed, and the customer decides that dealing with someone with greater skills that lives in a higher wage place is a better investment.

      I am grateful for the fact that different options exist. Most projects that I could view as "competition" with low waged workers are not the types of projects I'd like to be involved with. The person shipping the project out typically has no long term relationship with the outside entity, is EXTREMELY price conscientious, is unable to clearly state what they want, and has very limited abilities to evaluate the quality of what they receive. These are people I do not want to deal with, until they have decided that they want to spend some serious money and change their viewpoints.

      For me, it is a good thing that purchasers of goods and services have an option VASTLY different than what I'd like to sell. It allows them to segment themselves, and not come to me until they are the types of purchasers that I'd like to deal with. I would waste a lot of time dealing with the lower end of the market if these release valves didn't exist.

      Throughout this response, I've tried to make it clear that these ideas only represent my viewpoint : I do not consider what low wage / low skilled people to be selling to be competition. I have never wanted to compete at the bottom, and I recommend that anyone involved with ./ not compete with prisoners, or outsourcing companies.

    10. Re:Of course! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As a convicted felon who served 2 1/2 years in prison and have spent the last 10 years working for ATT and IBM, I'm going to have to disagree. I make over $100k per year and I deserve it because I'm a good engineer regardless of my past criminal record. There's no reason they should not make as much as you and I if they have the skills.

      When I was in prison, I actually tried to learn programming and was denied the opportunity to even read coding books because the department of prisons said it would make me a smarter criminal. So I went back to college when I got out and got my degree in computer science. I think the shift in the emphasis on training and education are absolutely critical to keeping people out of prison. Period. There is no other way. Prison as a punishment simply isn't enough to prevent crime or recidivism. People need something positive to strive for instead of constantly struggling to survive.

      So, if you're a convict - do not give up! Educate yourself and be persistent and it will pay off, I promise.

    11. Re:Of course! by WGFCrafty · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're confusing protected minorities with non-protected ones.

      Protected ones are race, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation.

      Non-protected ones are smokers, criminals, nihilists, believing the earth is flat, which teletubby is your favorite and MANY more.

      If you could easily get jobs with a criminal record there would probably be less recidivism. Making a law that forbids you from not hiring criminals would however be quite stupid. If you embezzle money, it would be pretty dumb if they couldn't discriminate when hiring for an accountant position you were otherwise qualified for.

    12. Re:Of course! by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Informative

      Since such discrimination is illegal, and the government (and society) has an interest in getting these people jobs, expect any suspected discrimination to be challenged in the courts.

      [Citation needed]

      It's NOT illegal to discriminate against ex-cons. Otherwise, how it is that so many companies get away with running criminal background checks? Are you saying that all these companies pay to run background checks but then can't actually use them in the hiring decision process??

      Things are changing a bit, though, and it is getting a little harder to discriminate overtly. For what's really happening, see for example, here:

      Federal labor laws do not explicitly prohibit companies from discriminating against ex-offenders. ... Most of the rules spelling out what an employer can and can't do come from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is stepping up scrutiny of employer hiring practices. Corporate policies that immediately screen former criminals can disadvantage minorities and violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the agency says. In April 2012 it issued a "guidance"--a set of rules for companies to follow in evaluating job applications of released prisoners. The guidelines "create a burden on the employer to do a more individualized assessment" at the start of the hiring process, says Andria Lure Ryan, a labor lawyer in Atlanta, and not simply weed out ex-offenders from the start. The agency acknowledges there are valid reasons why some employers--a day care center, for instance--might not want to hire someone who has committed certain kinds of crimes. In such cases, the guidance says rejecting those applicants is OK. And there are federal regulations against hiring people convicted of violent crimes for jobs in airport security, among other fields.

      In sum -- there's no explicit law against discriminating against ex-cons. It *IS* illegal to discriminate against minorities, and since a disproportionate number of ex-cons are minorities, the federal government has said businesses need to be careful.

      In practice, however, what this means is now many companies tend not to do a background check immediately upon receipt of an application, but rather do some sort of interview or other screening first, then only do the background check later in the process.

      At that point, employers still often toss people out of the pool of applicants for previous convictions. There's no federal law preventing that, particularly if the company gave them "fair consideration" early in the process before doing the background check. (Some states and cities have more policies to prevent such discrimination, such as the "Ban the Box" movement, but if a company can justify running a background check, it's hard to prevent discriminatory actions.)

    13. Re:Of course! by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is only one reason to hire a criminal, and that is planning to do something criminal.

      Well, there's also the situation where the ex-con is actually good at what he does. Back in 2010 I did some contract work for a large and established company (big/old enough to have a pre-ARIN /16 netblock), and I shared a cubicle with a guy that had a third-degree felony battery conviction after putting a guy in the hospital during a bar fight years earlier, and happened to be a wicked sharp Java coder with great customer interaction skills. Even with the clearly disclosed felony on his record, he was eventually extended quite a nice offer to go onboard as a permanent employee.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    14. Re:Of course! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Other countries do it, and have far lower prison populations per capita. 40% of all working-age Americans have a criminal record. Do you really want them all to be unemployable, and having to return to crime to survive?

      Believing that it is not possible for someone to reform is a self-fulfilling prophecy when you then also enact policies that actively drive them back to crime. Not too smart, especially when many of the crimes are minor. How do you expect a sex worker to get out of the trade if you cut her off from the alternatives that are open to everyone else? Or anyone else who has a criminal record, for that matter?

      We had a police captain here who was caught stealing cocaine from the evidence locker. Arrested, convicted, did his time, and while inside learned how to be an accountant. Got a job while living in a half-way house. Now he's a tax-payer again. Win-win for everyone.

      Or you can keep building jails. Just remember, you're the one footing the bill for it.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    15. Re:Of course! by ranton · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If they can hire 10 really motivated coders (and after a few years in "the big house", they'll be motivated), for next to nothing after taking into account subsidies, for less than 1 of you, many will take the chance, because the bottom line is the bottom line.

      They can already do this now with foreign labor. And they can already hire 4 low quality recent college grads for the same price as well. But they don't, because they don't want to deal with a large team of people causing their bosses more headaches than they are worth. They don't want to deal with inaccurate data on their corporate reports, support cases which are orphaned in the database, or business users who refuse to use their new CRM/ERP systems since it is too buggy to be useful. They want someone who fixes problems, not people who create them.

      Many pointy hair bosses aren't smart enough to realize the value of quality employees, but enough of them are.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    16. Re:Of course! by pla · · Score: 2

      For those who still want to believe that there's a long-term future in coding ... how DO you plan to compete with people who have no debt from education and will qualify for massive job subsidies?

      I don't worry about it because I don't buy into the bullshit idea that anyone can do anything if they just have the opportunity and apply themselves.

      Many of the same attributes that make someone a good programmer act in directly opposition to those shortcomings that make someone a criminal (the capriciousness of the US legal system aside) - Problem solving, impulse control, ability to sit motionless for hours, ability to attend to a task despite external distractions, solid math background, early exposure to technology and the luxury of spending time learning it, etc.

      I honestly don't believe that everyone can learn to code; and of those who can, a large majority would hate it. When I describe what I do to most (educated and intelligent) people, they involuntarily cringe.

      Yes, this program will probable find a few gems who fell through the cracks early in life (at the expense of millions of taxpayer dollars, of course). I feel comfortable that I can withstand a few dozen subsidized competitors entering my profession per year.

    17. Re:Of course! by ranton · · Score: 2

      So, if you're a convict - do not give up! Educate yourself and be persistent and it will pay off, I promise.

      Unless you know of a few dozen of your fellow inmates who also pull in 6 digit salaries, I think you are a bit of a rare success story. That is great, and rare success stories do happen. For instance I flunked out of college, worked as a shift supervisor at a fast food restaurant until I was 24, and still crossed the $100k barrier as a software developer by the age of 32. But I sure wouldn't advise average college drop outs that they are likely to have the same lucky success I did. For instance there were also many things working in my favor: been programming since I was 8, above average intelligence even among college graduates, a supportive family as a safety net while I was failing in life, etc. Something tells me you were an above average convict as well.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    18. Re:Of course! by sumdumass · · Score: 2

      Well, I started out thinking there wasn't a law on the books yet, but here is some of what was done. I guess sealing the record is one thing.

      http://www.cleveland.com/open/...

      and

        http://www.ideastream.org/news...

    19. Re:Of course! by dreamchaser · · Score: 2

      It is not illegal to deny employment on the basis of criminal background. That's the very reason so many employers do background checks. It doesn't necessarily disqualify a person but it certain can be used in the decision making process.

    20. Re:Of course! by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      I think this is the statistic he's talking about.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    21. Re:Of course! by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about if they're the best person for the job?

      People make mistakes. Everyone does. Most of the time that doesn't result in a criminal conviction. In a small number of cases it does.

      More-over, most of the students I went to University with are unconvicted criminals, guilty of serious felonies related to illegal drug use. Around 40% of prisoners are in prison for similar (as in drugs related) non-violent crimes.

      What's (seriously) the difference between the two? Why do the guys who spent time get to be blocked from having the jobs given to the other guys, when both DID THE EXACT SAME CRIME?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    22. Re:Of course! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not only that, but they are already used to working in a 6x4 cell!

    23. Re:Of course! by russotto · · Score: 4, Informative

      Appears to be false; the statistic of 40% relates to the percentage of American men who have been arrested by age 23, not the percentage of working-age Americans with a criminal record. It includes juvenile arrests for status offenses (e.g. truancy, underaged drinking) and also arrests for which there was no conviction.

      I've been arrested (twice, even), and I do not have a "criminal record". First arrest all charges were dropped and the arrest record expunged, second arrest was for a matter not rising to the level of a criminal offense (NYC ordinance "violation"); I took adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (does not require an admission of guilt).

    24. Re:Of course! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think this is the statistic he's talking about.

      psst - s/he/she/ :-)

      No, this one (partial quote only)

      The FBI estimates that 50 percent of its criminal records contain errors. No HR professional wants to hire a person with DUI convictions to drive a vehicle or someone convicted of child abuse to work in a school. But disqualifying every applicant with a criminal record for every job is unnecessary.

      This is especially true because of profound changes in the criminal-justice system. When I was 17, I punched another young man in an argument in the local pool hall. The security guards promptly "escorted" me to the manager’s office. The manager called my father, who assured the manager that if he would allow my father to handle the situation, I would never enter his establishment for the rest of my life. To this day, I have never returned. If my son were to repeat my foolish mistake, he would unquestionably be arrested for assault and battery, and the conviction would follow him for the rest of his life. Literally millions of people in the United States today have criminal records because they were caught smoking marijuana at a rock concert 10 years ago, accidentally bounced a check, or got into a shoving match with another driver after a fender bender. Many of these people can be excellent employees.

      Consequences

      Refusing to hire anyone with a record is not only unnecessary, it takes a huge bite out of the applicant pool. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, 30 percent of America’s adult population has a criminal record. Among people of working age, about 40 percent have criminal records. For some demographic groups, the rate is even higher. More than 50 percent of Black males have a criminal record. As the United States’ demographics continue to change, the problem presented by using criminal records as an employment screen will continue to grow.

      Enforcement of the law is still highly selective. How many banksters went to jail?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    25. Re:Of course! by MechaStreisand · · Score: 2

      Do you really want them all to be unemployable, and having to return to crime to survive?

      I don't, and most non-horrible people don't, but the prison-industrial complex does, and that's the enemy here.

      --
      Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
    26. Re:Of course! by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

      Maybe it's time to see how other countries

      ...

      You can stop right there. We don't care what other countries do, because they'll all eventually have McDonalds, Pizza Hut and diabetes.

      The world will be reforged in America's own image!

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    27. Re:Of course! by quenda · · Score: 2

      ... then it's including some very violent subcultures. But we can't say that, of course. Maybe we need to change the violent subcultures,

      You mean young black males? Plenty have said that. But violent crime is responsible for a minority of the prison population, and a much smaller minority of convictions, and so those with criminal records. A huge number have records for non-violent drug offences.
      It would be a lot easier to abolish the War on Drugs, given its blatant failure, than to change subcultures. Though cutting the flow of drug money wouldn't hurt.

    28. Re:Of course! by mysidia · · Score: 2

      If you could easily get jobs with a criminal record there would probably be less recidivism. Making a law that forbids you from not hiring criminals would however be quite stupid. If you embezzle money, ....

      If you have committed robbery, drug trafficking, DUI, sexual offenses, etc, we don't want you on our property, as our staff would feel uncomfortable knowing that their safety may be at risk due to having to work with some potential violent criminals, let alone trying to apply for a position.

      We have customers who are schools, many employees need to visit their premises for various reasons, and they also require background checks on agents.

      If we send some employee to a school, and they steal something, or commit rape or assault against a teacher or student, it is our company that would look bad.

      Therefore, I think the idea of not discriminating against convicted criminals is insane.

      Their jail term was their official sentence, but just b/c their jail term ended, does not mean that all members of society should be happy to accept them fully back into the fold with no questions, no restrictions, and the same level of trust as a 'clean' citizen.

  2. Obligatory joke,,, by tchdab1 · · Score: 2

    ...about capitalism doing it the other way around.

  3. What could possibly go wrong? by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Funny

    Are we going to use them for NSA contractors, coders for various banks and such? Maybe let them write software for various government contracts right? Great idea!!

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  4. Actually, I'd like to see the reverse of that . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I am sometimes debugging some " programmers' " code . . . I think that the programmer belongs in jail.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  5. No Internet? by tonywestonuk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I learnt programming on an old VIC20, there was no stinking internet.... just a few books I got from the library. Really, I think that the internet can be a huge distraction.... and, if cut off from the internet, I would probably do my best work!

    1. Re:No Internet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Enough is enough: I've had it with the motherfucking code on the motherfucking plane!

    2. Re:No Internet? by TeknoHog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Code on a plane; it's wonderful.

      Just don't use Python.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  6. Not just programming by sir-gold · · Score: 3, Funny

    While we are at it, lets teach them chemistry, horticulture, and forensics too.

    That way, they will have the skills to become professional criminals when they get out, instead of the amateur criminals they were when they got caught originally.

    1. Re:Not just programming by DanielOom · · Score: 2

      America is falling behind compared to malware production overseas:-)

      Incidentally, our country had a very similar program about twenty years ago.

  7. How about teaching them management skills by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean, they are already criminals, the rest should be easy.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. Tuition-Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Yes, your honor. I did attempt to attack the police officer with a piece of fruit. I deserve to be sentenced for say, oh. Hm.... Two semesters".

  9. Dupe from Nov 25, 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This story already appeared on Slashdot back on Nov 25, 2013. So how many ex-con coders have been hired since then? How successful is this program? Given the prevalence of really short "boot camp" coder training programs, many cohorts of these ex-con coders should have been released from prison (they're not training lifers or long-term convicts, are they?) and established themselves in the workforce. We should have some hard numbers by now about how effective this program is.

  10. Good grief! by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2

    'Coding' is not the be-all and end-all of 'good jobs'. Plumbing, carpentry, electrical...any one of a thousand other professions.

    J.O.B.
    Do that first.

    Of all the money spent on this program, I predict exactly 1 person will actually end up with a job as a 'coder'. (and he will suck at it)

    1. Re:Good grief! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      The converse is that what is so special about coding compared to other things that people think it shouldn't be taught?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  11. What's next? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

    Who will we teach to "code" next?

    Babies? Nursing home residents? Beagles?

  12. idiot by globaljustin · · Score: 2

    it's wrong *not* to give them the basic services humans need

    their rights have been revoked...so they are "wards of the state" and must be treated humanely

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  13. It's just the reverse of the cubicle system by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    It's just the reverse of the cubicle system .. which turned coders into prisoners