I read the original piece and let’s give the author the benefit of the doubt and treat it as a pure thought experiment rather than a suggestion. Some issues the author did not touch upon:
The quality of the solution is based purely on the author’s perspective, who has never gone to jail but considers it their 3rd biggest fear in life. I’m not convinced that this perspective is sufficient to judge the solution.
The author considers this all in terms of cost reduction and throws in that it would reduce violence because it would simply be impossible for inmates to cause violence since they would be physically isolated from everyone. In my opinion, a social solution should be defined in terms of the social problem they are trying to solve and the cost should be a secondary concern. The author does not touch at if an inmate would be socialized at all when they come back into normal society. Perhaps the author thinks that Second Life via an Oculus Rift is sufficiently similar to real life that one doesn’t need to worry about it but I would say that is pretty naive. It’s not unreasonable to think that the violence might just get moved around. What about self-harm or not having the social skills needed to survive when one comes out of prison.
What if someone doesn’t like Soylent? It’s one thing to not really like prison food but it does have texture and distinction between ingredients. Soylent is just liquid. I can’t speak for other people drinking Soylent for every meal for possibly years would not help my mental health.
In my opinion, the article is the equivalent of web framework speed benchmarks. It chose to simulate something that is not very nuanced, easy to measure, and gives you a number you can compare to other things. But it fails to address the pain points that actually exist and leaves so much nuance off it’s unclear how valuable the analysis actually is. The reader is left with a false sense of understanding and no appreciation for the nuanced actually involved. The “data driven” culture that is popular in technology right now usually means we limit ourselves to things that are easy to measure.
I read the original piece and let’s give the author the benefit of the doubt and treat it as a pure thought experiment rather than a suggestion. Some issues the author did not touch upon:
In my opinion, the article is the equivalent of web framework speed benchmarks. It chose to simulate something that is not very nuanced, easy to measure, and gives you a number you can compare to other things. But it fails to address the pain points that actually exist and leaves so much nuance off it’s unclear how valuable the analysis actually is. The reader is left with a false sense of understanding and no appreciation for the nuanced actually involved. The “data driven” culture that is popular in technology right now usually means we limit ourselves to things that are easy to measure.