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

Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

kjzz.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 434 posts

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#11

Post by rileymat2 »

tantalor wrote: post #6

This isn't a "bug". The problem is the software was not designed to do this and needs to be updated to support a change in requirements Bugs are when software does something it isn't supposed to, or doesn't do something it is supposed to. In this case, it's doing exactly what it was intended to do when it was implemented and put into service. Since then things have changed, so the vendor needs to implement the featur…

There is a lot of reasonable opinions on the topic, but I would consider design and requirements bugs that render the software unfit for purpose to be bugs as well.

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#12

Post by londons_explore »

tantalor wrote: post #6

This isn't a "bug". The problem is the software was not designed to do this and needs to be updated to support a change in requirements Bugs are when software does something it isn't supposed to, or doesn't do something it is supposed to. In this case, it's doing exactly what it was intended to do when it was implemented and put into service. Since then things have changed, so the vendor needs to implement the featur…

1 person-year is pretty much the smallest labor unit when quoting for modifications to government contracts.

If the government wants to change the logo on the login screen, they're gonna pay 1 person-year. Why would I quote less? It'll take over 1 person-year for another contractor to pick up and start supporting the codebase, and we won't support a codebase that another contractor has touched.

It's just the nature of government IT. Lowball the initial quote, then charge massively for any modifications and support now they're locked in.

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#13

Post by vorpalhex »

This seems like a problem for the prison, not the inmates. In general, the prison software being faulty means the prison should just hand-calculate this as needed. The inmates should still be able to be released as appropriate.

If it costs the prison 10x normal costs to do calculations by hand.. well, that's the cost of business.

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#14

Post by adolph »

edoceo wrote: post #3

It's like gov system don't even have test cases. They should, and they should be public. Why aren't these softwares for the public open source? See also: employment security sites, cannabis track and trace, driving license, etc. Some of these bugs cause direct financial harm to citizens and this one is much worse! Show me the test cases! Show me the code!!

Well, I can't show you the test cases and code, but the available requirements are pretty tough to go through:

https://www.azleg.gov/ARStitle/

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#15

Post by blobbers »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #4
notwhereyouare wrote: post #2

That article just kept getting worse and worse. They mention assigning a penalty to the wrong inmate and they couldn't fix it. All of a sudden that person could no longer make calls for 30 days, and they did nothing wrong to get that.

“Show me the incentives, I’ll show you the outcome.” If corrections staff were held personally liable for these failures, or the local jurisdiction faced steep financial penalties, it wouldn’t happen. No liability, no responsibility.

These are prison workers and you're asking them to run a social network (with certain constraints).

They wouldn't even know the first thing about how to hire someone capable of doing this. They'd have to hire a consultant to hire another consultant.

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#16

Post by toomuchtodo »

blobbers wrote: post #15
toomuchtodo wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Show me the incentives, I’ll show you the outcome.” If corrections staff were held personally liable for these failures, or the local jurisdiction faced steep financial penalties, it wouldn’t happen. No liability, no responsibility.

These are prison workers and you're asking them to run a social network (with certain constraints). They wouldn't even know the first thing about how to hire someone capable of doing this. They'd have to hire a consultant to hire another consultant.

Corrections management is who I would consider the directly responsible party, not corrections ICs (to be clear, no scapegoats). The buck stops somewhere when we’re talking about infringing on someone’s right to freedom. Excuses are unacceptable.

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#17

Post by opportune »

tantalor wrote: post #6

This isn't a "bug". The problem is the software was not designed to do this and needs to be updated to support a change in requirements Bugs are when software does something it isn't supposed to, or doesn't do something it is supposed to. In this case, it's doing exactly what it was intended to do when it was implemented and put into service. Since then things have changed, so the vendor needs to implement the featur…

This is why I think custom software contracting and vendorization is a “noob-trap”.

Software needs to be updated and maintained and you never know when you start writing it what the real requirements are. If I were a taxpayer in this state I’d be angry that my money would be going to a series of middlemen (e.g. a procurement consultant, program manager on the gov side, a contractor manager, the contracting company’s cut) rather than some state employed software developer.

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#18

Post by sparrish »

vorpalhex wrote: post #13

This seems like a problem for the prison, not the inmates. In general, the prison software being faulty means the prison should just hand-calculate this as needed. The inmates should still be able to be released as appropriate. If it costs the prison 10x normal costs to do calculations by hand.. well, that's the cost of business.

And that's exactly what they're doing (according to the article)

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#19

Post by undecisive »

djrogers wrote: post #5

I'd hesitate to call this a software bug, this is a complete breakdown of planning. FTA - "“Currently this calculation is not in ACIS at all,” the report states. “ACIS can calculate 1 earned credit for every 6 days served, but this is a new calculation.”" tldr; a new law was passed that allowed for a different credit schedule for days served, and the system hasn't been updated to make that calculation.

It's the problem with silver bullets like YAGNI: Laws change, if your system is dependent on laws, then you can be sure that new rules will need to be added. You need a system that is configurable, you can be sure you are going to need it.

Of course, if there's money to be made in having a change-resistant system, well that's a different story. YAGNIAYWPTTNFI (You ARE gonna need it, and you will pay through the nose for it) isn't quite as catchy though

Re: Whistleblowers: Software keeping inmates in Arizona prisons beyond release dates

#20

Post by frompdx »

This is an outrage. It is also a perfect example of how software is used to create increasingly more elaborate and faceless bureaucracies that force individuals to spend more and more time contending with them. Somehow software has become the ultimate vehicle for bureaucratic violence. Software is simultaneously infallible and the perfect scapegoat. The inmate who lost their phone privileges for 30 days is an example. They did nothing wrong but the computer says so and nothing can be done. The computer is right in the sense that its decision cannot be undone, and solely to blame since no human can undo its edict or be held accountable, apparently. It is tragic and absurd.

There was an Ask HN question the other day where the poster asked if the software we are building is making the world a better place. There were hardly any replies at all. Is this because for the most part our efforts in producing software are actually doing the opposite? It certainly seems that way reading articles like this.

Post reply on HN