4 ms·

What part of the title is misleading? the HN title fixes simply removes some inaccurate language from the original article.

the_only_law 4y ago
Titles aren't supposed to be editorlized in general on HN. I think there are some cases where it's ok, perhaps if the title is particularly nonsensical or clickbaity.
nverno 4y ago
'inmates' is a more accurate descriptor. A 'slave' could refer to anyone being forced to work for no pay, whereas an inmate means that as well as a bunch of other relevant stuff.
- x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
  In this case, the difference in "inmate" and "slave" is the degree of charitableness given to the US. On articles concerning China's Uighur camps, we don't see the word "inmate" being used.
  - nverno 4y ago
    I think 'slave' is overly negative usage in this case. A 'slave' implies people that were enslaved with no justification, imo. You don't normally hear POWs or inmates referred to as slaves. The fact that inmates are made to work is hardly the worst part of their punishment.
    - markovbot 4y ago
      > A 'slave' implies people that were enslaved with no justification it absolutely does not, and to suggest so is absurd. In America, black people have been enslaved with all sorts of justifications about how they were of an "inferior race", how they were "naturally" more violent and "animalistic", etc and how their enslavement was actually good for them.
      - nverno 4y ago
        Those were rationalizations. Nobody thinks enslavement like that is justified.
        markovbot 4y ago
        Well people certainly thought so at the time. Personally I don't believe the rationalization given for modern slavery either, but apparently you do so it's a "justified" slavery.
    - clerk_occam 4y ago
      Implying that sometimes it’s justified to enslave people?
      - nverno 4y ago
        Well, yea, what else can you do with violent murderers and the like? Or POWs?
        markovbot 4y ago
        You understand we're not just talking about putting people in jail, right? We're talking about FORCING them to work? From the article: > The ACLU also found that more than 76 percent of incarcerated workers surveyed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics say that “they are required to work or face additional punishments such as solitary confinement, denial of opportunities to reduce their sentence, and loss of family visitation.”
        nverno 4y ago
        There are a lot of gray areas around imprisoning people. I (like all other apes and probably most intelligent animals in the world) believe 'eye for an eye' is basically the embodiment of true justice. Everything else is a mix of punishment and practicality. The fact that inmates are forced to work is so low on the level of what their punishment is, that it doesn't even register in my book. I think most inmates actually like having jobs to do. From what you cited, it sounds like if they don't like it, they can just sit in solitary instead. And as far as rehabilitation goes, it seems like an essential ingredient. It would definitely be nice to give them a decent wage, but I think this is an area where practicality matters as well- prisons cost money and man-hours. I don't know about the economics, but getting rid of for-profit prisons seems like a good idea.
        Scalene2 4y ago
        You do realize that a huge percentage of violent criminals are never caught right?
    - Scalene2 4y ago
      Prisoners of war generally have more legal protections against slavery than those incarcerated under the US justice system.
- notch656a 4y ago
  Slaves often became that way by violating the customs of their native lands. In the US, the state calls people who violate codified customs "criminals."
  - nomel 4y ago
    This is an interesting, blunt, perspective. Thanks!
Overtonwindow 4y ago
Actual title is:US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’
- markovbot 4y ago
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    From the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
    - markovbot 4y ago
      the original article title is misleading: it implies that the people doing involuntary labor aren't slaves.
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        > the original article title is misleading: it implies that the people doing involuntary labor aren't slaves. If they're slaves, then tell me where you can buy one to own as property. Being literally owned is an important part of the definition of that word in this sense.
        markovbot 4y ago
        wow, you got me. The fact that I can't personally purchase and own one of these humans means they're not slaves. As you know, the definition of slavery definitely includes something about slaves being bought and sold in a public marketplace.
        moistly 4y ago
        > tell me where you can buy one to own as property Just buy a judge or two. Judges Plead Guilty in Scheme to Jail Youths for Profit: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/13judge.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/13judge.html
tablespoon 4y ago
> What part of the title is misleading? the HN title fixes simply removes some inaccurate language from the original article. The HN title is editorialized by injecting tendentious and controversial framing not present in the OP article let alone the OP title. It's not even accurate, these practices seem far closer to "involuntary servitude" than "slavery." The term "slave," at least in the American context, implies being chattel, which none of these prisoners are. For the record, here's the OP title: > US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’ And here's the current HN post title: "US prison slaves produce $11B worth of goods and services."

the_only_law 4y ago

Titles aren't supposed to be editorlized in general on HN. I think there are some cases where it's ok, perhaps if the title is particularly nonsensical or clickbaity.

nverno 4y ago

'inmates' is a more accurate descriptor. A 'slave' could refer to anyone being forced to work for no pay, whereas an inmate means that as well as a bunch of other relevant stuff.

x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
In this case, the difference in "inmate" and "slave" is the degree of charitableness given to the US. On articles concerning China's Uighur camps, we don't see the word "inmate" being used.
- nverno 4y ago
  I think 'slave' is overly negative usage in this case. A 'slave' implies people that were enslaved with no justification, imo. You don't normally hear POWs or inmates referred to as slaves. The fact that inmates are made to work is hardly the worst part of their punishment.
  - markovbot 4y ago
    > A 'slave' implies people that were enslaved with no justification it absolutely does not, and to suggest so is absurd. In America, black people have been enslaved with all sorts of justifications about how they were of an "inferior race", how they were "naturally" more violent and "animalistic", etc and how their enslavement was actually good for them.
    - nverno 4y ago
      Those were rationalizations. Nobody thinks enslavement like that is justified.
      - markovbot 4y ago
        Well people certainly thought so at the time. Personally I don't believe the rationalization given for modern slavery either, but apparently you do so it's a "justified" slavery.
  - clerk_occam 4y ago
    Implying that sometimes it’s justified to enslave people?
    - nverno 4y ago
      Well, yea, what else can you do with violent murderers and the like? Or POWs?
      - markovbot 4y ago
        You understand we're not just talking about putting people in jail, right? We're talking about FORCING them to work? From the article: > The ACLU also found that more than 76 percent of incarcerated workers surveyed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics say that “they are required to work or face additional punishments such as solitary confinement, denial of opportunities to reduce their sentence, and loss of family visitation.”
        nverno 4y ago
        There are a lot of gray areas around imprisoning people. I (like all other apes and probably most intelligent animals in the world) believe 'eye for an eye' is basically the embodiment of true justice. Everything else is a mix of punishment and practicality. The fact that inmates are forced to work is so low on the level of what their punishment is, that it doesn't even register in my book. I think most inmates actually like having jobs to do. From what you cited, it sounds like if they don't like it, they can just sit in solitary instead. And as far as rehabilitation goes, it seems like an essential ingredient. It would definitely be nice to give them a decent wage, but I think this is an area where practicality matters as well- prisons cost money and man-hours. I don't know about the economics, but getting rid of for-profit prisons seems like a good idea.
      - Scalene2 4y ago
        You do realize that a huge percentage of violent criminals are never caught right?
  - Scalene2 4y ago
    Prisoners of war generally have more legal protections against slavery than those incarcerated under the US justice system.
notch656a 4y ago
Slaves often became that way by violating the customs of their native lands. In the US, the state calls people who violate codified customs "criminals."
- nomel 4y ago
  This is an interesting, blunt, perspective. Thanks!

Overtonwindow 4y ago

Actual title is:US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’

markovbot 4y ago
- sokoloff 4y ago
  From the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
  - markovbot 4y ago
    the original article title is misleading: it implies that the people doing involuntary labor aren't slaves.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > the original article title is misleading: it implies that the people doing involuntary labor aren't slaves. If they're slaves, then tell me where you can buy one to own as property. Being literally owned is an important part of the definition of that word in this sense.
      - markovbot 4y ago
        wow, you got me. The fact that I can't personally purchase and own one of these humans means they're not slaves. As you know, the definition of slavery definitely includes something about slaves being bought and sold in a public marketplace.
      - moistly 4y ago
        > tell me where you can buy one to own as property Just buy a judge or two. Judges Plead Guilty in Scheme to Jail Youths for Profit: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/13judge.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/13judge.html

tablespoon 4y ago

> What part of the title is misleading? the HN title fixes simply removes some inaccurate language from the original article. The HN title is editorialized by injecting tendentious and controversial framing not present in the OP article let alone the OP title. It's not even accurate, these practices seem far closer to "involuntary servitude" than "slavery." The term "slave," at least in the American context, implies being chattel, which none of these prisoners are. For the record, here's the OP title: > US prison workers produce $11B worth of goods and services for ‘little to no pay at all’ And here's the current HN post title: "US prison slaves produce $11B worth of goods and services."