Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 141 posts

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#111

Post by joemi »

FabHK wrote: post #45
ourmandave wrote: post #4

The article is about sneaking phones (and chargers) into prisons and all the things around that. Obviously it's possible to get reasonably large items up your bottom, otherwise fisting wouldn't be such a popular hobby, but for the purposes of easy storage and retrieval, you're going to want to go as small as possible. Look, I've had plenty of "How did I get here?" moments on the internet, but this is the first time i…

Somewhat unusually, the headline is neither misleading nor clickbait - you indeed get what you click for.

It's pretty typical of Vice, I'd say. They don't need to make their titles clickbait-y since they purposefully write about shocking/taboo things.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#112

Post by Florin_Andrei »

tzs wrote: post #93

It astonishes me that in prison, where your jailers have: • complete control over where you live, • complete control of your movements, • complete control over your physical interaction with people who are not prison staff or other inmates, • in the US almost no fourth amendment restrictions on searching your living space or possessions and so can pretty much arbitrarily conduct extensive searches for prohibited item…

> that it is actually possible for a significant number of prisoners to keep their smuggled items hidden once they get them in

Read 'Papillon' by Henri Charrière. The autobiography of a long-term prison inmate. Well written. It's amazing what people do to maintain some small freedoms in a coercive environment.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#114

Post by burnte »

joshfraser wrote: post #113

For those wondering why phones are banned in the first place - It's bad for business. Data shows that regular communication with family is one of the best ways to lower recidivism. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2014/apr/15/lowering-re...

Well, no, it's because jail/prison is supposed to be punishment, even though we occasionally pretend it's for rehabilitation. There are many studies like the one you link that show ways in which we could improve our prison system to reduce recidivism, violence, etc., but the people who run it aren't sympathetic to the inmates, and voters don't vote for politicians that run on helping those in prison.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#115

Post by rconti »

ourmandave wrote: post #4

The article is about sneaking phones (and chargers) into prisons and all the things around that. Obviously it's possible to get reasonably large items up your bottom, otherwise fisting wouldn't be such a popular hobby, but for the purposes of easy storage and retrieval, you're going to want to go as small as possible. Look, I've had plenty of "How did I get here?" moments on the internet, but this is the first time i…

Somehow I read it as "CAMERAS" so I thought it was about endoscopes or something. Still, happy with how my reading experience turned out.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#116

Post by joshfraser »

burnte wrote: post #114
joshfraser wrote: post #113

For those wondering why phones are banned in the first place - It's bad for business. Data shows that regular communication with family is one of the best ways to lower recidivism. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2014/apr/15/lowering-re...

Well, no, it's because jail/prison is supposed to be punishment, even though we occasionally pretend it's for rehabilitation. There are many studies like the one you link that show ways in which we could improve our prison system to reduce recidivism, violence, etc., but the people who run it aren't sympathetic to the inmates, and voters don't vote for politicians that run on helping those in prison.

I'm sure the fact that so many of our prisons are private, for-profit entities has nothing to do with it.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#117

Post by ericcumbee »

gaius wrote: post #105
tzs wrote: post #93

It astonishes me that in prison, where your jailers have: • complete control over where you live, • complete control of your movements, • complete control over your physical interaction with people who are not prison staff or other inmates, • in the US almost no fourth amendment restrictions on searching your living space or possessions and so can pretty much arbitrarily conduct extensive searches for prohibited item…

What you're missing is that the guards are complicit. Some identify more with their inmates than with the outside world.

I don't think it is even that...look at how much your average corrections officer or law enforcement officer is paid...and then ask yourself why so many of them can be corrupted by a little bit of money.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#118

Post by wang_li »

tzs wrote: post #93

It astonishes me that in prison, where your jailers have: • complete control over where you live, • complete control of your movements, • complete control over your physical interaction with people who are not prison staff or other inmates, • in the US almost no fourth amendment restrictions on searching your living space or possessions and so can pretty much arbitrarily conduct extensive searches for prohibited item…

Honestly I'm not sure why prisons wouldn't be a little pleased that inmates are sneaking in cellphones. The prison could run a stingray on site and collect, at a minimum, the metadata about calls and I would imagine full recordings of calls.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#119

Post by icantdrive55 »

whathaschanged wrote: post #96
tzs wrote: post #93

It astonishes me that in prison, where your jailers have: • complete control over where you live, • complete control of your movements, • complete control over your physical interaction with people who are not prison staff or other inmates, • in the US almost no fourth amendment restrictions on searching your living space or possessions and so can pretty much arbitrarily conduct extensive searches for prohibited item…

Most contraband is not hooped (stored in the butt). It comes from crooked sheriffs and police officers whose union prevents their being searched properly before entering and exiting work.

I worked as a state security guard in college.

90% plus of the shenanigans were carried off by security personnel, Insiders, and local cops.

I basically watched a hugh building in San Francisco on the weekends.

I only spoke up when they tried to blame it on public, or the homeless. Blaming the homeless was a go to. I remember they tried to blame the homeless for stealing 10 tons of electrical switching gear. Gear so heavy, it needed special fork lift to move. By speaking up--meaning I just refused to go along with them blaming innocent people for their thefts, but I knew my place.

Whenever their was a theft, or break-in; I just knew it was an inside job. The denial was huge. I personally didn't care, I just didn't want to get shot.

My boss was the most honest man I have ever known though. I think he knew how corrupt the "good guys" were, but knew not to rock the boat. He had a good heart too. They would reprimand him for feeding the cats, but he really loved all animals. Very few men left a good impression on me, but I still think about him.

Re: Tiny Phones That Go Inside a Butt (2016)

#120

Post by placeybordeaux »

burnte wrote: post #114
joshfraser wrote: post #113

For those wondering why phones are banned in the first place - It's bad for business. Data shows that regular communication with family is one of the best ways to lower recidivism. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2014/apr/15/lowering-re...

Well, no, it's because jail/prison is supposed to be punishment, even though we occasionally pretend it's for rehabilitation. There are many studies like the one you link that show ways in which we could improve our prison system to reduce recidivism, violence, etc., but the people who run it aren't sympathetic to the inmates, and voters don't vote for politicians that run on helping those in prison.

The purpose of prisons isn't well agreed upon. It could be for keeping the population safe from people that would do them harm. It could be to punish those who do harm because those who do bad things deserve to be punish. It could be make everyone believe they will be punished if they do something wrong and therefore deter bad behavior. It could be to control someone enough to rehabilitate them.

There's probably others. Not everyone agrees on which one the US judicial system obeys.

Post reply on HN