How would this be meaningfully different than house arrest? Not that it's a terrible idea but we already have exactly this except that the reason you would use

How would this be meaningfully different than house arrest? Not that it's a terrible idea but we already have exactly this except that the reason you would use Amazon is simply becsuse you had to as there's no other services with similar reliability. House arrest would probably be better for the government too since the 'prisoner' is paying personal rates rather than whatever Amazon might charge the government for the "service". The only advantage to prison is that it gurantees lodging during the forced homestead which is significant because, contrary to the rosy image painted by portrayals of these people as victims of the system, most of these people are screwups who arent going to have the rent money to keep living where they reside if you bar them from leaving home. The practical implementation would be likely be to just issue section 8 style rent vouchers and contract with gig services and ghost kitchens to ensure you're not liable for starving people to death. After all, Amazon already does the things you've described for the most part anyway. It would probably be much cheaper than real jail. The main other expense that comes to mind is the utility bills and an insurance plan for when the 'prisoners' inevitably vandalize the home you've obligated into keeping them.