My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison • Hacker News Board

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#81

Post by nendroid » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #11

caseyscottmckay wrote: post #8

We need more of this. A criminal record in the US is a curse for life, leaving former criminals with little chance at success and little to live for. People without much to live for are dangerous. We should help our former criminals rather than condemn them for life--it benefits us all.

People are losing their jobs because of offhand tweets completely unrelated to their occupation; how can we expect that a blemish as big as a criminal record will be overlooked?

You can tweet racist stuff and still be president of the United States. The law protects him from the emotions of the masses. This law does not extend over to your employment at a commercial company.

The reason why people lose their jobs for racist tweets is because companies are reacting to the emotional sentiment of the masses and pulling a PR maneuver.

In short, for commercial jobs, it doesn't matter your crime, or the degree of your crime or whether you committed a crime at all, it's about business and a negative public emotional mood against you at this current point in time is usually bad for business (or stock prices).

Case in point, Let's say hypothetically that the OP could have mentioned that this woman's violent crime was repeatedly beating a 8 year old child for no reason and the public's emotional reaction would be drastically different. I'm not sure what her crime really was, but there is definitely a reason why it was omitted: The OP likely made a rational judgement about the crime and is likely very aware that the emotional reaction to the crime by the masses would be drastically different than her own rational judgement... thus from this line of reasoning she has chosen not to mention what the crime was.

It's a fine line here. I think if I really got to know a person and I can really understand a person, I feel even a child beater or can be redeemed in my eyes but I can see how in the eyes of the public this can never happen. (Also let's be clear here, I'm not saying the womans crime was beating a child, just using that as an example).

People are rarely rational and when you measure the reactions of people in response to stimuli in aggregate you will find that the bigger the aggregate the more emotional the reaction is.

This is how a criminal who committed a violent crime can get public support for finding a job, and an innocent man who made a mistake and wrote a stupid tweet can lose any prospect at finding a future career.

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#82

Post by saagarjha » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

s_dev wrote: post #31

caseyscottmckay wrote: post #8

We need more of this. A criminal record in the US is a curse for life, leaving former criminals with little chance at success and little to live for. People without much to live for are dangerous. We should help our former criminals rather than condemn them for life--it benefits us all.

>A criminal record in the US is a curse for life The US system probably is overly harsh -- in Ireland it's probaby overly lenient and the pendulum affect is that we've criminals being called in to court with literally hundreds of prior convictions and then they're let off with suspended sentences and then go straight back to what they were doing. Equally frustrating -- to see the guilty just walk off and laugh as it…

> Equally frustrating -- to see the guilty just walk off and laugh as it is to see the redeemed struggle having conceded their mistakes.

That of course depends on your value system. There are many that consider sending an innocent person to jail far worse than letting a guilty person walk free, and I’m sure you can apply a similar worldview here as well.

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#83

Post by shawndrost » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

thelean12 wrote: post #14

There are a lot of people saying they're in favor of this type of thing. And for non-violent offenses I'd probably also be on board. But this person committed a "serious, violent crime" that sent them to prison for 13 years. Are you comfortable sitting next to someone who is capable of a "serious, violent crime"? Are there certain crimes that cross the line for you? Would you expect your employer to inform you of the…

I was a co-creator of The Last Mile's coding program, and taught many classes in San Quentin prison. The students were generally there for a decade plus, for violent crimes.

I would sit next to any of them for any length of time. They pose zero threat to anyone.

This is for two reasons: 1. Generally, violent crimes are done by very young and poor people. By the time they get out of prison, they aren't very young any more. If they have a good job, they aren't poor either. 2. If a prison lets someone in an educational program, you know the system considers them safe. The system buckets inmates; behavioral offenses are harshly penalized; everyone in a classroom is an angel, and they won't stop being an angel on the outside.

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#84

Post by Mvandenbergh » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

thelean12 wrote: post #14

There are a lot of people saying they're in favor of this type of thing. And for non-violent offenses I'd probably also be on board. But this person committed a "serious, violent crime" that sent them to prison for 13 years. Are you comfortable sitting next to someone who is capable of a "serious, violent crime"? Are there certain crimes that cross the line for you? Would you expect your employer to inform you of the…

>"But this person committed a "serious, violent crime" that sent them to prison for 13 years. Are you comfortable sitting next to someone who is capable of a "serious, violent crime"? Are there certain crimes that cross the line for you? Would you expect your employer to inform you of their record?"

I would not feel comfortable sitting next to someone who was substantially more capable of committing a serious, violent crime (which might indeed have been murder if she did 13 years) than an average member of the population and I would expect an employer to take my welfare and safety into account.

The question is whether someone who did do that and went to prison for it is so much more likely to commit such a crime than average. I don't know the answer to that but I don't think it's outrageous to think the answer is "no".

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#85

Post by aero142 » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

thelean12 wrote: post #14

There are a lot of people saying they're in favor of this type of thing. And for non-violent offenses I'd probably also be on board. But this person committed a "serious, violent crime" that sent them to prison for 13 years. Are you comfortable sitting next to someone who is capable of a "serious, violent crime"? Are there certain crimes that cross the line for you? Would you expect your employer to inform you of the…

Honestly, I'm more worried about what 13 years in prison did to the person than the original crime. We don't know what the original crime was so it is hard to say in this case. Perhaps they have some deep, anti-social personality flaw and I wouldn't want to sit next to them. I would be concerned about sitting next to an innocent person who spent 13 years in prison, though. For me, that is a root issue. How many criminals are flawed people vs people who made a mistake or reacted badly to an isolated situation or just didn't have the skills or maturity to handle a difficult situation. I'm reminded of a quote I heard once. "Crime is committed by the young but prison is full of old men." People aren't the same their whole lives.

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#86

Post by celdon25 » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

staticassertion wrote: post #20

nickff wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are losing their jobs because of offhand tweets completely unrelated to their occupation; how can we expect that a blemish as big as a criminal record will be overlooked?

I'd rather hire a criminal (depending on the crime, obviously) than, say, a racist, especially given how many laws I disagree with.

What percentage of the population do you estimate is made up of these racists?

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#87

Post by saithound » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #11

caseyscottmckay wrote: post #8

We need more of this. A criminal record in the US is a curse for life, leaving former criminals with little chance at success and little to live for. People without much to live for are dangerous. We should help our former criminals rather than condemn them for life--it benefits us all.

People are losing their jobs because of offhand tweets completely unrelated to their occupation; how can we expect that a blemish as big as a criminal record will be overlooked?

Unfortunately, I don't think that's it. The same subset of my coworkers who requested that we don't invite Scott Aaronson to our colloquium because he said something vaguely anti-feminist years ago are perfectly happy to praise (literal murderer and talented number theorist) Christopher Havens, and I'm sure would be happy to have him employed by our department.

edit: Of course, universities still don't hire violent offenders, but I don't think the reasons for not employing a Twitter-pariah and not employing a murderer are closely related at all.

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#88

Post by Meph504 » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

codingdave wrote: post #44

thelean12 wrote: post #14

There are a lot of people saying they're in favor of this type of thing. And for non-violent offenses I'd probably also be on board. But this person committed a "serious, violent crime" that sent them to prison for 13 years. Are you comfortable sitting next to someone who is capable of a "serious, violent crime"? Are there certain crimes that cross the line for you? Would you expect your employer to inform you of the…

Are you comfortable being judged on the worst thing you've ever done in your life? Sure, a violent crime is worse than some bone-headed mistake made at a college party, or whatever your worst moment is. But how much have you grown up since then? Would you do it again? Or are you older and wiser? Well, they are probably older and wiser, too.

Put yourself in a companies position, if you hire someone who had a violent past, and they commit a violent crime while at work, or to a coworker or client off the clock, the company will be held liable, no two ways about it, it will come back on the company.

Additionally, there are countless contracts that require you specifically not have anyone with criminal convictions, and require full background checks to be awarded the contracts, even more so if it was a violent felony.

Those are two very serious liabilities to a company, I understand that people deserve a second chance, but do you put your company at risk to give it to them?

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#89

Post by meheleventyone » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:38 PM UTC

thelean12 wrote: post #14

There are a lot of people saying they're in favor of this type of thing. And for non-violent offenses I'd probably also be on board. But this person committed a "serious, violent crime" that sent them to prison for 13 years. Are you comfortable sitting next to someone who is capable of a "serious, violent crime"? Are there certain crimes that cross the line for you? Would you expect your employer to inform you of the…

Not to worry you unduly but how many people are you already sitting next to capable of "serious, violent crime"?

Re: My friend starts her job today, after learning to program in prison

#90

Post by bityard » Thu, Oct 01, 2020, 4:38 PM UTC

jnwatson wrote: post #9

Unfortunately, the worst offender of this is the federal government. Essentially any federal position, regardless of actual job position, requires a background check.

Which is a good thing. A background check looks for past, present, and future issues that could indicate a pattern of unethical or illegal behavior, or conflicts of interest. Every employee, regardless of actual job position, is given some level of inherent trust over the country's money, data, or physical assets. A background check is a minimal defense against misplacing that trust.

(Insert snide remark about elected/appointed politicians here.)