Scientists will never find just one single addiction gene. Susceptibility to addiction is the result of many interacting genes. Social and environmental factors contribute to this risk of addiction. It is becoming increasingly clear that genetic factors also weigh in. Like other behavioral diseases, addiction vulnerability is a very complex trait. Many factors determine the likelihood that someone will become an addict. There are many ways that genes could cause one person to be more vulnerable to addiction than another. - Dr. Glen Hanson
So addiction can be attributed to a weak genetic makeup. Not really a surprise. If we allowed nature to remove those weak genes from our gene pool then our species would be stronger and more able to resist addiction in future generations? By allowing bad genes to proliferate into future generations we just prolong and even exacerbate the problem.
Before I criticize a man, I walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot.
Scientists will never find just one single addiction gene. Susceptibility to addiction is the result of many interacting genes. Social and environmental factors contribute to this risk of addiction. It is becoming increasingly clear that genetic factors also weigh in. Like other behavioral diseases, addiction vulnerability is a very complex trait. Many factors determine the likelihood that someone will become an addict. There are many ways that genes could cause one person to be more vulnerable to addiction than another. - Dr. Glen Hanson
So addiction can be attributed to a weak genetic makeup. Not really a surprise. If we allowed nature to remove those weak genes from our gene pool then our species would be stronger and more able to resist addiction in future generations? By allowing bad genes to proliferate into future generations we just prolong and even exacerbate the problem.
Yes, and then we can all evolve to the master race of perfect human beings. This sounds like something that someone said in the 1940's. Some german dude, what was his name? And didn't he mass genocide millions of people to repopulate europe with his version of "the master race'"?
I will explain it right here why. MMO companies tend not to give a damn about people really. Some companies like in Lineage 2, Guild wars, Give you in game messages saying, you have been playing for an extended period of time, Please consider taking a break, However I will explain why most people dont. In lineage 2 they tell you to take a break, but you spend 10 mins + real life time regenerating mana instead of gaining experience you could of taken a break within that time, Sadly its the truth. Everyone is right, It is up to the person who is playing it to know when to stop, and limit their self, however this is where it is the mmo companies fault. Final Fantasy XI, NO solo Play, You spend hours waiting for a group to play and level up, They recomend you take break's, but when can you? So much time waiting to find a group. World OF Warcraft. With all these expanisions, Season armor sets, IT Takes a lot of gold to compete in the market, Get the best gear, Or a lot of time of playing. Now there are a few ways of doing this. #1 Put down about $300 a month on Gold to afford the best gear, and stuff, And then spend hours a day raiding to get your full gear set, ect. These companies also add Gear to it every year, making it impossible for the game to ever end, and crap like that, gear based games. So to stay on top in general people spend hours a day playing, or pay gold farmers and ect to use their accounts, or buy gold, and espically now that world of warcraft costs 5000G for an epic mount + 1000 G For dual spec. These things should be free pretty much to enjoy the game, however their purpose is to help take gold out of the economy it makes it hard for legit players to get by and everything. Economy, and GEAR is the real reason people kill themselfs trying to stay on top of the game, If game companies did more about it, or if it was required by LAW for u.s game companies then there would be no problem, It is something I would change if I ever had the power to do such a thing. I myself have spent sometimes 3 days on world of warcraft multi leveling multiple accounts and stuff, 72 hours awake +. Does Blizzard or any other company care? The answer in my opinion is no, because as long as they get their $16.95 a month they dont really care if i play 30 days straight, unless I am violationg their Terms OF Service, They allow it. So here is the best answer I think.
+ 10
Renoaku wins.
And read the DOCTORS OPINION Wise, it's a combination of factors. In my experience transferring to harder drugs always started in a very innocent, inconspicous way like a BEER or a glass of wine. According to the DOCTOR, after that genetics do play a part that could lead up to the CRACK PIPE.
Anyway, Renoaku just fatalitied this thread, this conversation is over for now.
First, All i see Renoaku crying about is Blizzard or other game companies not caring that he doesn't have the will to limit his own shit.
As for your link, it shows nothing of relevance. There is no hard scientific evidence for genetics being responsible for addiction. They even say "other factors" have to be in play. They also say no one gene can be identified. So they can't identify the gene(s), but they just know that the gene is there. Give me a damn break.
The fact of the matter is the scientist don't "know" a damn thing, they are theorizing.
I will explain it right here why. MMO companies tend not to give a damn about people really. Some companies like in Lineage 2, Guild wars, Give you in game messages saying, you have been playing for an extended period of time, Please consider taking a break, However I will explain why most people dont. In lineage 2 they tell you to take a break, but you spend 10 mins + real life time regenerating mana instead of gaining experience you could of taken a break within that time, Sadly its the truth. Everyone is right, It is up to the person who is playing it to know when to stop, and limit their self, however this is where it is the mmo companies fault. Final Fantasy XI, NO solo Play, You spend hours waiting for a group to play and level up, They recomend you take break's, but when can you? So much time waiting to find a group. World OF Warcraft. With all these expanisions, Season armor sets, IT Takes a lot of gold to compete in the market, Get the best gear, Or a lot of time of playing. Now there are a few ways of doing this. #1 Put down about $300 a month on Gold to afford the best gear, and stuff, And then spend hours a day raiding to get your full gear set, ect. These companies also add Gear to it every year, making it impossible for the game to ever end, and crap like that, gear based games. So to stay on top in general people spend hours a day playing, or pay gold farmers and ect to use their accounts, or buy gold, and espically now that world of warcraft costs 5000G for an epic mount + 1000 G For dual spec. These things should be free pretty much to enjoy the game, however their purpose is to help take gold out of the economy it makes it hard for legit players to get by and everything. Economy, and GEAR is the real reason people kill themselfs trying to stay on top of the game, If game companies did more about it, or if it was required by LAW for u.s game companies then there would be no problem, It is something I would change if I ever had the power to do such a thing. I myself have spent sometimes 3 days on world of warcraft multi leveling multiple accounts and stuff, 72 hours awake +. Does Blizzard or any other company care? The answer in my opinion is no, because as long as they get their $16.95 a month they dont really care if i play 30 days straight, unless I am violationg their Terms OF Service, They allow it. So here is the best answer I think.
+ 10
Renoaku wins.
And read the DOCTORS OPINION Wise, it's a combination of factors. In my experience transferring to harder drugs always started in a very innocent, inconspicous way like a BEER or a glass of wine. According to the DOCTOR, after that genetics do play a part that could lead up to the CRACK PIPE.
Anyway, Renoaku just fatalitied this thread, this conversation is over for now.
First, All i see Renoaku crying about is Blizzard or other game companies not caring that he doesn't have the will to limit his own shit.
As for your link, it shows nothing of relevance. There is no hard scientific evidence for genetics being responsible for addiction. They even say "other factors" have to be in play. They also say no one gene can be identified. So they can't identify the gene(s), but they just know that the gene is there. Give me a damn break.
The fact of the matter is the scientist don't "know" a damn thing, they are theorizing.
Susceptibility to addiction is the result of many interacting genes. Many, not one, he said many "interacting".
I will explain it right here why. MMO companies tend not to give a damn about people really. Some companies like in Lineage 2, Guild wars, Give you in game messages saying, you have been playing for an extended period of time, Please consider taking a break, However I will explain why most people dont. In lineage 2 they tell you to take a break, but you spend 10 mins + real life time regenerating mana instead of gaining experience you could of taken a break within that time, Sadly its the truth. Everyone is right, It is up to the person who is playing it to know when to stop, and limit their self, however this is where it is the mmo companies fault. Final Fantasy XI, NO solo Play, You spend hours waiting for a group to play and level up, They recomend you take break's, but when can you? So much time waiting to find a group. World OF Warcraft. With all these expanisions, Season armor sets, IT Takes a lot of gold to compete in the market, Get the best gear, Or a lot of time of playing. Now there are a few ways of doing this. #1 Put down about $300 a month on Gold to afford the best gear, and stuff, And then spend hours a day raiding to get your full gear set, ect. These companies also add Gear to it every year, making it impossible for the game to ever end, and crap like that, gear based games. So to stay on top in general people spend hours a day playing, or pay gold farmers and ect to use their accounts, or buy gold, and espically now that world of warcraft costs 5000G for an epic mount + 1000 G For dual spec. These things should be free pretty much to enjoy the game, however their purpose is to help take gold out of the economy it makes it hard for legit players to get by and everything. Economy, and GEAR is the real reason people kill themselfs trying to stay on top of the game, If game companies did more about it, or if it was required by LAW for u.s game companies then there would be no problem, It is something I would change if I ever had the power to do such a thing. I myself have spent sometimes 3 days on world of warcraft multi leveling multiple accounts and stuff, 72 hours awake +. Does Blizzard or any other company care? The answer in my opinion is no, because as long as they get their $16.95 a month they dont really care if i play 30 days straight, unless I am violationg their Terms OF Service, They allow it. So here is the best answer I think.
+ 10
Renoaku wins.
And read the DOCTORS OPINION Wise, it's a combination of factors. In my experience transferring to harder drugs always started in a very innocent, inconspicous way like a BEER or a glass of wine. According to the DOCTOR, after that genetics do play a part that could lead up to the CRACK PIPE.
Anyway, Renoaku just fatalitied this thread, this conversation is over for now.
First, All i see Renoaku crying about is Blizzard or other game companies not caring that he doesn't have the will to limit his own shit.
As for your link, it shows nothing of relevance. There is no hard scientific evidence for genetics being responsible for addiction. They even say "other factors" have to be in play. They also say no one gene can be identified. So they can't identify the gene(s), but they just know that the gene is there. Give me a damn break.
The fact of the matter is the scientist don't "know" a damn thing, they are theorizing.
Susceptibility to addiction is the result of many interacting genes. Many, not one, he said many "interacting".
OKOKOK, I'm off to bed. Goonite.
And he says this with no examples.
Maybe I should say you are one of the main contributing factors of global warming. After all, i only have to state something to make it true in your eyes, right? Or do i have to have a Ph.D in writing skills?
Edit: Just thought I'd add, i just showed this thread to my uncle who happens to be a currently practicing heroin addict. You know what he says? "It's my choice".
Maybe if more people had that sort of integrity and self-responsibility, the world wouldn't need bleeding heart "let's save everyone" people. Hmmm, maybe you should see if babying others is genetic, too?
Yes, and then we can all evolve to the master race of perfect human beings. This sounds like something that someone said in the 1940's. Some german dude, what was his name? And didn't he mass genocide millions of people to repopulate europe with his version of "the master race'"? Well if you can't guess who he is, here's a hint: He plays wow too!
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
Before I criticize a man, I walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot.
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
Yes, and then we can all evolve to the master race of perfect human beings. This sounds like something that someone said in the 1940's. Some german dude, what was his name? And didn't he mass genocide millions of people to repopulate europe with his version of "the master race'"? Well if you can't guess who he is, here's a hint: He plays wow too!
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
Technology itself isn't natural. Are you suggesting we abandon our technological infrastructure and go back living as nomads in harmony with nature?
Yes, and then we can all evolve to the master race of perfect human beings. This sounds like something that someone said in the 1940's. Some german dude, what was his name? And didn't he mass genocide millions of people to repopulate europe with his version of "the master race'"? Well if you can't guess who he is, here's a hint: He plays wow too!
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
Technology itself isn't natural. Are you suggesting we abandon our technological infrastructure and go back living as nomads in harmony with nature?
I believe what he's saying is evolution is adaptation. As humanity grew from cro-magnon to modern human, we adapted to the environment to survive. As modern man became more advanced, we slowly started adapting nature to fit us. That is not how evolution it is meant to be
He's not suggesting we give up technology. What he is saying is, when we have a major climate change or other natural disaster where the natural environment is suddenly drastically changed, mother nature will win over technology. Technology will not stop widespread flooding, massive earthquakes of a global scale, widespread drought, famine, etc., etc.
The only way humanity will continue will be through those able and fit to survive and adapt, thus continuing with natural evolution.
Have you ever noticed the difference between a healthy avid backpacker/mountain climber/etc, who relies on his physical conditioning and sharp faculties; compared to a healthy bookkeeper sitting at his computer all day, relying on technology to push him along?
Which one do you think would likely make it through a global disaster where technology has been destroyed?
And more to the point of the original topic, who do you think will adapt successfully to a massive/major change, a healthy individual with a strong will, or someone who has no will or at best a very weak will?
By supporting those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and do not have the will required to survive, let alone thrive,, we spit in the face of mother nature. What happens when she spits back?
Look in nature. What happens in a wolf pack when a member of the pack becomes a hinderance to the packs' survival? The pack leaves it behind, forced to carry the responsibility of its own life or death on its own.
Now take a moment and remember that we are the human animal. Although we do have the unique traits of compassion, conscience, etc., we are still an animal .And natural laws apply to all animals when it comes to survival as a species.
Because people are responsible for themselves. Not the game company, not the government.
One should beware of these kinds of comments about "responsibility" as a personal disposition. Responsibility is a hollow and superficial device to make people believe they are in control of their own destinies as a matter of free-will and choice. Of course it is nothing of the sort. Instead the entire "responsibilization" rhetoric is positioned by those who control how we act and think. In effect "being responsible" means to follow a code of duty that is superimposed on people by governments, companies and institutions. (e.g. responsible parents and adults) It is myth and has no basis in how things actually get done.
Please, don't. That post was hardy applicable to the topic at all, and most likely only served to make yourself feel more intelligent based on the replies you expected to get.
Natural selection. Survival of the fittest. Removal of unneeded dumbasses from an already over-abundant population of unneeded dumbasses. Pick whichever works for you.
I pick survival of the fittest. Although we have had laws to stop that from actually happening for a very long time now. I mean if you assault anyone you go to jail.
No wait, I pick Natural Selection. Although we have nothing much to fear from mother nature. Except earthquakes, floods, droughts, volcanoes, and tsunami's. But I hardly see how random people dying to unpredictable events is getting rid of dumbasses.
Oh wait. Very clever. It was a trick question. Ahahahah i get it now.
Yeah I think its absolutely appaling that no safety warnings are given out with games......because they are EXTREMELY dangerous products!!!! I have been playing Spellborn recently and I nearly died!! I was playing it for days on end without stopping once!! I didnt eat anything, drink anything or sleep at all because the damned game didnt tell me too! Fortunately a friend found me in time and saved my life. Phew! That was a real close call I can tell ya. Now I deeply fear playing any more of these dangerous games.......but......but.......I MUST play them! I cannot stop!! However if a safety warning appeared every hour saying things like "Take a 20 minute break", "Go to the toilet" or "Isnt it time you went to sleep young man?" then I might feel more safe playing as my life would not be put into such extreme danger. I also believe that safety warnings should be attached to EVERYTHING!!! I was reading a book several weeks ago and guess what? I NEARLY DIED!!!! I couldnt put it down......and the problem is that I'm a slooooooowwww reader. Again I didnt eat, sleep or even go to the toilet when I needed to. I was sat in a pool of my own excrement and urine. It was very unhealthy indeed. Fortunately I was saved by a friend again. None of this would have happened if there was a safety warning on every 10th page.......but because I wasnt told how to look after myself, that damned book nearly killed me!!! So yes I call for safety warnings on everything!! This is a very dangerous world we live in and millions of peoples lives are being put at risk with every game, book, film, food, drink, car, bike, horse, plane or any other object or activity that gets utilised by someone. My heart goes out to every deeply intelligent and wise soul that has been snuffed out by a lethal computer game. It needs to be stopped or it wont be long before the entire human race becomes extinct!
truly your my hero lol. i haven't laughed that hard in a long time, epic win for you.
Playing or interested in playing SWTOR? Use my referral link here and we will both get rewards! Including a week of game time for you, if you are a preferred status player! Click here for more info!
Technology itself isn't natural. Are you suggesting we abandon our technological infrastructure and go back living as nomads in harmony with nature?
I believe what he's saying is evolution is adaptation. As humanity grew from cro-magnon to modern human, we adapted to the environment to survive. As modern man became more advanced, we slowly started adapting nature to fit us. That is not how evolution it is meant to be
He's not suggesting we give up technology. What he is saying is, when we have a major climate change or other natural disaster where the natural environment is suddenly drastically changed, mother nature will win over technology. Technology will not stop widespread flooding, massive earthquakes of a global scale, widespread drought, famine, etc., etc.
The only way humanity will continue will be through those able and fit to survive and adapt, thus continuing with natural evolution.
Have you ever noticed the difference between a healthy avid backpacker/mountain climber/etc, who relies on his physical conditioning and sharp faculties; compared to a healthy bookkeeper sitting at his computer all day, relying on technology to push him along?
Which one do you think would likely make it through a global disaster where technology has been destroyed?
And more to the point of the original topic, who do you think will adapt successfully to a massive/major change, a healthy individual with a strong will, or someone who has no will or at best a very weak will?
By supporting those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and do not have the will required to survive, let alone thrive,, we spit in the face of mother nature. What happens when she spits back?
Look in nature. What happens in a wolf pack when a member of the pack becomes a hinderance to the packs' survival? The pack leaves it behind, forced to carry the responsibility of its own life or death on its own.
Now take a moment and remember that we are the human animal. Although we do have the unique traits of compassion, conscience, etc., we are still an animal .And natural laws apply to all animals when it comes to survival as a species.
The reason for technology is from understanding mother nature. From looking, learning and planning ahead. How many "man made" items are merely some imitation of natural physical and chemical processes. Technology is bending nature to our will. Our technological infrastructure is our new environment. You can't blame someone for surviving in the new environment. But at the same time how can you stick to the old ways? If you are not prepared to weed the garden, don't complain about the view.
I could go on about what I think the future of human society should be. Funny thing is it has many parallels to MMOG's .
The thing is though, you think you are very capable. In this environment. If another Ice age did come, would your success in this time translate to success in that time? It's hard to say.
And you talk of will. Imagine the will of someone capable of going without food or water or the bathroom for that long to succeed at some goal. I think that gamers have some primative genes which once were useful, but now only serve to get them into more trouble. I don't think that going back that way is desirable. How else can you explain their genetic make-up in this day and age?
As to the Wolf analogy. I have seen the very thing in a nature documentary. Arguably it could all be bullshit, but bear with me. The wolf in question was a lower male. The alpha bitch made herself available to this male. He got a surprise when the Alpha Dog came back and ran him out of town. This brings up pack politics and whether or not the alpha bitch hadn't intended this all along. Basically he had to go. Because every time the alpha dog saw him he was in a fight. And of course if the alpha male attacks all the other members follow. Including the alpha female. This male went on to found his own territory with his own mate. The end. Kleenex pls.
I know we are an animal. I have seen grown lions as playful as kittens. They are treated well and have all they need. We don't have to lower ourselves to savagery. But I guess some crave it. Because it is to their advantage.
A completely useless waste of space this is. As others have said, it is merely a person's choice.
And you missed one, a 28 yr old korean male died after playing a game 28 hrs straight. Never leaving the computer for more then a few minutes to use the bathroom. He had a choice to stop, as I recall I believe he was in a cybercafe that whole time.
My guess is your nothing more then a forum drama queen starving for attention.
Playing: Not much actively. Games played: to many to list, been playing MMO's since 2001 --------------------------
Yes, and then we can all evolve to the master race of perfect human beings. This sounds like something that someone said in the 1940's. Some german dude, what was his name? And didn't he mass genocide millions of people to repopulate europe with his version of "the master race'"? Well if you can't guess who he is, here's a hint: He plays wow too!
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
So you think the most intelligent course of action is to do nothing to avoid impending disaster.......
Our population is getting sicker & dumber? Could it be that we are only becoming more aware of the illnesses and diseases that plague humans? Could our lifestyles have changed dramatically over a very short period? Could it be that professions have become more demanding requiring greater mental skill? And that existing genetic make-ups no longer cut it?
The notion that every life is valuable was founded for a very good reason. Unfortunately that reason is no longer relevant. Why? because we won. Evolution never stops. To reset the clock is to change the environment. Which is to go back to square one!!
The problem is, if you have superior genes, in the event of technological infrastructure failure you're survival is influenced far more by chance. Surely it is better to maintain the current climate and simply change social views rationaly. Like China's one child policy. Or being wiser and genetically screening people to avoid possible bad match ups. Rather than "Hopefully then we will get it right." You're talking like life is a video game where you can mash a reset button.
LEAVE NATURAL SELECTION ALONE!!! YOU'RE LUCKY SHE EVEN...performed...for you?
Anyway.
"The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands, To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming! On we sweep with threshing oar, our only goal will be the western shore."
Why aren't there more warnings in and out of game to take breaks? Why has no-one been held accountable or sued? Is it because most of them are Asian and no-one cares? Is it because no-one wants to believe that a game can take over someone's live so much that only someone with "no self-control" will die? Why aren't more people asking questions like me?!
Warning texts wont help, morons die anyways. You just have to take your own responsibility.
Keep an eye on your kids and yourself for that matter. There are parental systems in most games where you can put how many hours a day anyone can play, use them.
Some people can missuse anything, drugs, alcohol, food, games and so on. A warning sign never helped anyone to quit smoking or drink less and it wont help any gamer either.
It is your life to do as you choose with, that is called freedom. And as a parent it is you responsibility that your kids dont become criminals or play to much. I know that americans are happy about stupid warning labels but they have never and will never help anyone for anything.
People know that playing 48 hours without sleep is not good, or they are so stupid that they cant read anyways.
So you think the most intelligent course of action is to do nothing to avoid impending disaster....... Our population is getting sicker & dumber? Could it be that we are only becoming more aware of the illnesses and diseases that plague humans? Could our lifestyles have changed dramatically over a very short period? Could it be that professions have become more demanding requiring greater mental skill? And that existing genetic make-ups no longer cut it? The notion that every life is valuable was founded for a very good reason. Unfortunately that reason is no longer relevant. Why? because we won. Evolution never stops. To reset the clock is to change the environment. Which is to go back to square one!! The problem is, if you have superior genes, in the event of technological infrastructure failure you're survival is influenced far more by chance. Surely it is better to maintain the current climate and simply change social views rationaly. Like China's one child policy. Or being wiser and genetically screening people to avoid possible bad match ups. Rather than "Hopefully then we will get it right." You're talking like life is a video game where you can mash a reset button.
I am certainly not saying that when faced with a disaster that we stand around doing nothing. Of course we will try and protect ourselves. Self preservation is one of the key elements of evolution. We can't evolve if we aren't here.
What I'm saying is that only the strong and smart and healthy should survive to make the species viable in the long run. If a tornado hits near a group of 10 people and 8 of them run and get out of the way (smart) and 2 decide to stand there and admire it (dumb) then those two are gonna die and their death improves the overall population. Before they died the population consisted of 80% smart people and 20% dumb. After the tornado came now 100% of the population are smart, at least when it comes to knowing that tornadoes are not your friend.
So to the game players that forget to take care of themselves, their deaths make us stronger as a species. Why would I want to expend energy saving them from their own stupidity and increasing their numbers. If you find a rotten piece of fruit in the basket do you leave it in there? No you throw it out or the whole basket will be ruined.
As for technology I think that as a whole is it both a blessing and a curse. Technology for the most part works against nature. It allows us to do things that we are not able to do naturally or allows us to resist natural forces that would otherwise affect us. However when that technology fails we are completely and utterly helpless. Our society is amazingly fragile and one little burp in our technology can cause chaos. I think that technology should support our lives rather than completely defining our lives. We need to learn to live without technology as well as with it.
I like the fact that I can hop on the computer and communicate with people all over the world. However I also know that it is not a replacement for direct human contact which is vital for a healthy balanced existence.
As for mashing the reset button, yea mother nature loves doing that. It has happened millions of times. Sometimes mother nature just gives up and starts again. Well over 90% of the species that have ever lived on this planet are gone. Why did they vanish? Natural selection. They cannot adapt to a changing world and they die. Evolution is not always a slow process. There are massive spikes in evolutionary change driven by extreme rapid change whether that be climate, disease or famine. Those spikes cause more extinctions than not because rapid change is harder to adapt too than gradual change.
The plague wiped out nearly two thirds of Europe's population. The people that survived were the strong ones with resistance to the disease or the intelligence to know that it was caused by living in filth with rats (who were infested with fleas) and avoided those conditions. The plague thinned our herd leaving it stronger. It happens all time time. The swine flu is the latest example of this. It will kill off lots of people with weak immune systems or the already sick. Science will try and fight it with drugs and that will just cause it to evolve to resist the drugs.
Medicine against things like a virus actually accelerate its evolution. Think about it. A population of a virus is like any other organism. They have weak individuals and strong ones. Evolution happens at a gradual pace in that population but there are massive spikes that cause rapid evolutionary changes. So science identifies a drug that kills off most of the virus and they start giving it out to people and it works. The virus dies off but not all of it. Some of the virus are resistant to the drugs and now they are the only ones left. So what happens? The strong virus population multiplies and soon you have a whole new population of virus that are immune to the drugs that worked before. The virus evolved and became stronger because our medicine removed the weak individuals from the population. Its a never ending cycle. The swine flu bug is just the latest to evolve because of past treatments of the common flu. It will continue to happen as long as we keep driving it.
Just let nature take its course. Its not always a pleasant thought but it is for the greater good.
Before I criticize a man, I walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot.
There is a significantly larger number of people who die every year from drug and alchohol abuse. That doesn't mean it's ok. But video game addictions is small potatoes in comparison. That is my opinion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Right, I shouldn't listen to medical professionals. Maybe it's all a scam to regulate and control the masses, it's a conscpiracy!!!! What about people that are addicted to cigarettes? No way, smoking is cool. It's just a long drawn out death that ends up in some disgusting lung disease, don't tell me to quit I like smoking someone had once said. Personal choice, just like gaming. People are responsible for their own choices, whether they wish to recognize that fact or not. Right, it's all about choice. But sometimes genetic coding gets in the way and people might activate a dormant disease "like cancer". Now as humanity is concerned sometimes it takes an outside influence to help someone that can't see what they are doing is bad for their health. Example: Smoking. the government actually had to get involved and put HUGE taxes on cigarettes to deter people from smoking. But smoking concerns a chemical, what about something that doesn't. If you knew someone was making a wrong choice, would you try and help or cast judgement?
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
You can slap up whatever references you want, you still completely avoided and failed to respond to my point. Genetic disposition NEVER forces someone to use something the first time. That is ALWAYS a choice.
Honestly, this is just more of the "It's someone else's fault" rubbish that has been littering society and the media for a while now. "Johny played video games for 34 hours straight and died, but it can't be his fault, it must be the video game makers fault, or the computer manufacturers fault! We must find someone else to blame!"
No. It is his fault, and solely his fault. People really need to learn how to take responsibility for their own stupid actions and stop trying to lay blame on everyone else. Yeash.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Right, I shouldn't listen to medical professionals. Maybe it's all a scam to regulate and control the masses, it's a conscpiracy!!!! What about people that are addicted to cigarettes? No way, smoking is cool. It's just a long drawn out death that ends up in some disgusting lung disease, don't tell me to quit I like smoking someone had once said. Personal choice, just like gaming. People are responsible for their own choices, whether they wish to recognize that fact or not. Right, it's all about choice. But sometimes genetic coding gets in the way and people might activate a dormant disease "like cancer". Now as humanity is concerned sometimes it takes an outside influence to help someone that can't see what they are doing is bad for their health. Example: Smoking. the government actually had to get involved and put HUGE taxes on cigarettes to deter people from smoking. But smoking concerns a chemical, what about something that doesn't. If you knew someone was making a wrong choice, would you try and help or cast judgement?
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
You can slap up whatever references you want, you still completely avoided and failed to respond to my point. Genetic disposition NEVER forces someone to use something the first time. That is ALWAYS a choice.
Honestly, this is just more of the "It's someone else's fault" rubbish that has been littering society and the media for a while now. "Johny played video games for 34 hours straight and died, but it can't be his fault, it must be the video game makers fault, or the computer manufacturers fault! We must find someone else to blame!"
No. It is his fault, and solely his fault. People really need to learn how to take responsibility for their own stupid actions and stop trying to lay blame on everyone else. Yeash.
Right, I shouldn't listen to medical professionals. Maybe it's all a scam to regulate and control the masses, it's a conscpiracy!!!! What about people that are addicted to cigarettes? No way, smoking is cool. It's just a long drawn out death that ends up in some disgusting lung disease, don't tell me to quit I like smoking someone had once said. Personal choice, just like gaming. People are responsible for their own choices, whether they wish to recognize that fact or not. Right, it's all about choice. But sometimes genetic coding gets in the way and people might activate a dormant disease "like cancer". Now as humanity is concerned sometimes it takes an outside influence to help someone that can't see what they are doing is bad for their health. Example: Smoking. the government actually had to get involved and put HUGE taxes on cigarettes to deter people from smoking. But smoking concerns a chemical, what about something that doesn't. If you knew someone was making a wrong choice, would you try and help or cast judgement?
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
You can slap up whatever references you want, you still completely avoided and failed to respond to my point. Genetic disposition NEVER forces someone to use something the first time. That is ALWAYS a choice.
Honestly, this is just more of the "It's someone else's fault" rubbish that has been littering society and the media for a while now. "Johny played video games for 34 hours straight and died, but it can't be his fault, it must be the video game makers fault, or the computer manufacturers fault! We must find someone else to blame!"
No. It is his fault, and solely his fault. People really need to learn how to take responsibility for their own stupid actions and stop trying to lay blame on everyone else. Yeash.
hey AB dont waste your breath on this one
Yeah you are probably right. It's always a strange feeling knowing someone is never going to get it, yet still feeling compelled to knock common sense into them anyway.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Comments
So addiction can be attributed to a weak genetic makeup. Not really a surprise. If we allowed nature to remove those weak genes from our gene pool then our species would be stronger and more able to resist addiction in future generations? By allowing bad genes to proliferate into future generations we just prolong and even exacerbate the problem.
That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot.
So addiction can be attributed to a weak genetic makeup. Not really a surprise. If we allowed nature to remove those weak genes from our gene pool then our species would be stronger and more able to resist addiction in future generations? By allowing bad genes to proliferate into future generations we just prolong and even exacerbate the problem.
Yes, and then we can all evolve to the master race of perfect human beings. This sounds like something that someone said in the 1940's. Some german dude, what was his name? And didn't he mass genocide millions of people to repopulate europe with his version of "the master race'"?
Well if you can't guess who he is, here's a hint: He plays wow too!
+ 10
Renoaku wins.
And read the DOCTORS OPINION Wise, it's a combination of factors. In my experience transferring to harder drugs always started in a very innocent, inconspicous way like a BEER or a glass of wine. According to the DOCTOR, after that genetics do play a part that could lead up to the CRACK PIPE.
Anyway, Renoaku just fatalitied this thread, this conversation is over for now.
Goodnite and have fun,
Ink
Ok, heres the webiste AGAIN, wise. I'll be damned if I'm going to start writing out genetic codes to prove my already proven point. learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/genetics/
First, All i see Renoaku crying about is Blizzard or other game companies not caring that he doesn't have the will to limit his own shit.
As for your link, it shows nothing of relevance. There is no hard scientific evidence for genetics being responsible for addiction. They even say "other factors" have to be in play. They also say no one gene can be identified. So they can't identify the gene(s), but they just know that the gene is there. Give me a damn break.
The fact of the matter is the scientist don't "know" a damn thing, they are theorizing.
+ 10
Renoaku wins.
And read the DOCTORS OPINION Wise, it's a combination of factors. In my experience transferring to harder drugs always started in a very innocent, inconspicous way like a BEER or a glass of wine. According to the DOCTOR, after that genetics do play a part that could lead up to the CRACK PIPE.
Anyway, Renoaku just fatalitied this thread, this conversation is over for now.
Goodnite and have fun,
Ink
Ok, heres the webiste AGAIN, wise. I'll be damned if I'm going to start writing out genetic codes to prove my already proven point. learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/genetics/
First, All i see Renoaku crying about is Blizzard or other game companies not caring that he doesn't have the will to limit his own shit.
As for your link, it shows nothing of relevance. There is no hard scientific evidence for genetics being responsible for addiction. They even say "other factors" have to be in play. They also say no one gene can be identified. So they can't identify the gene(s), but they just know that the gene is there. Give me a damn break.
The fact of the matter is the scientist don't "know" a damn thing, they are theorizing.
Susceptibility to addiction is the result of many interacting genes. Many, not one, he said many "interacting".
OKOKOK, I'm off to bed. Goonite.
+ 10
Renoaku wins.
And read the DOCTORS OPINION Wise, it's a combination of factors. In my experience transferring to harder drugs always started in a very innocent, inconspicous way like a BEER or a glass of wine. According to the DOCTOR, after that genetics do play a part that could lead up to the CRACK PIPE.
Anyway, Renoaku just fatalitied this thread, this conversation is over for now.
Goodnite and have fun,
Ink
Ok, heres the webiste AGAIN, wise. I'll be damned if I'm going to start writing out genetic codes to prove my already proven point. learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/genetics/
First, All i see Renoaku crying about is Blizzard or other game companies not caring that he doesn't have the will to limit his own shit.
As for your link, it shows nothing of relevance. There is no hard scientific evidence for genetics being responsible for addiction. They even say "other factors" have to be in play. They also say no one gene can be identified. So they can't identify the gene(s), but they just know that the gene is there. Give me a damn break.
The fact of the matter is the scientist don't "know" a damn thing, they are theorizing.
Susceptibility to addiction is the result of many interacting genes. Many, not one, he said many "interacting".
OKOKOK, I'm off to bed. Goonite.
And he says this with no examples.
Maybe I should say you are one of the main contributing factors of global warming. After all, i only have to state something to make it true in your eyes, right? Or do i have to have a Ph.D in writing skills?
Edit: Just thought I'd add, i just showed this thread to my uncle who happens to be a currently practicing heroin addict. You know what he says? "It's my choice".
Maybe if more people had that sort of integrity and self-responsibility, the world wouldn't need bleeding heart "let's save everyone" people. Hmmm, maybe you should see if babying others is genetic, too?
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot.
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
So you think MMOG's are harmful?
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
Technology itself isn't natural. Are you suggesting we abandon our technological infrastructure and go back living as nomads in harmony with nature?
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
Technology itself isn't natural. Are you suggesting we abandon our technological infrastructure and go back living as nomads in harmony with nature?
I believe what he's saying is evolution is adaptation. As humanity grew from cro-magnon to modern human, we adapted to the environment to survive. As modern man became more advanced, we slowly started adapting nature to fit us. That is not how evolution it is meant to be
He's not suggesting we give up technology. What he is saying is, when we have a major climate change or other natural disaster where the natural environment is suddenly drastically changed, mother nature will win over technology. Technology will not stop widespread flooding, massive earthquakes of a global scale, widespread drought, famine, etc., etc.
The only way humanity will continue will be through those able and fit to survive and adapt, thus continuing with natural evolution.
Have you ever noticed the difference between a healthy avid backpacker/mountain climber/etc, who relies on his physical conditioning and sharp faculties; compared to a healthy bookkeeper sitting at his computer all day, relying on technology to push him along?
Which one do you think would likely make it through a global disaster where technology has been destroyed?
And more to the point of the original topic, who do you think will adapt successfully to a massive/major change, a healthy individual with a strong will, or someone who has no will or at best a very weak will?
By supporting those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and do not have the will required to survive, let alone thrive,, we spit in the face of mother nature. What happens when she spits back?
Look in nature. What happens in a wolf pack when a member of the pack becomes a hinderance to the packs' survival? The pack leaves it behind, forced to carry the responsibility of its own life or death on its own.
Now take a moment and remember that we are the human animal. Although we do have the unique traits of compassion, conscience, etc., we are still an animal .And natural laws apply to all animals when it comes to survival as a species.
One should beware of these kinds of comments about "responsibility" as a personal disposition. Responsibility is a hollow and superficial device to make people believe they are in control of their own destinies as a matter of free-will and choice. Of course it is nothing of the sort. Instead the entire "responsibilization" rhetoric is positioned by those who control how we act and think. In effect "being responsible" means to follow a code of duty that is superimposed on people by governments, companies and institutions. (e.g. responsible parents and adults) It is myth and has no basis in how things actually get done.
Please, don't. That post was hardy applicable to the topic at all, and most likely only served to make yourself feel more intelligent based on the replies you expected to get.
I bet he feels that way now after your post. : )
I pick survival of the fittest. Although we have had laws to stop that from actually happening for a very long time now. I mean if you assault anyone you go to jail.
No wait, I pick Natural Selection. Although we have nothing much to fear from mother nature. Except earthquakes, floods, droughts, volcanoes, and tsunami's. But I hardly see how random people dying to unpredictable events is getting rid of dumbasses.
Oh wait. Very clever. It was a trick question. Ahahahah i get it now.
truly your my hero lol. i haven't laughed that hard in a long time, epic win for you.
Technology itself isn't natural. Are you suggesting we abandon our technological infrastructure and go back living as nomads in harmony with nature?
I believe what he's saying is evolution is adaptation. As humanity grew from cro-magnon to modern human, we adapted to the environment to survive. As modern man became more advanced, we slowly started adapting nature to fit us. That is not how evolution it is meant to be
He's not suggesting we give up technology. What he is saying is, when we have a major climate change or other natural disaster where the natural environment is suddenly drastically changed, mother nature will win over technology. Technology will not stop widespread flooding, massive earthquakes of a global scale, widespread drought, famine, etc., etc.
The only way humanity will continue will be through those able and fit to survive and adapt, thus continuing with natural evolution.
Have you ever noticed the difference between a healthy avid backpacker/mountain climber/etc, who relies on his physical conditioning and sharp faculties; compared to a healthy bookkeeper sitting at his computer all day, relying on technology to push him along?
Which one do you think would likely make it through a global disaster where technology has been destroyed?
And more to the point of the original topic, who do you think will adapt successfully to a massive/major change, a healthy individual with a strong will, or someone who has no will or at best a very weak will?
By supporting those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and do not have the will required to survive, let alone thrive,, we spit in the face of mother nature. What happens when she spits back?
Look in nature. What happens in a wolf pack when a member of the pack becomes a hinderance to the packs' survival? The pack leaves it behind, forced to carry the responsibility of its own life or death on its own.
Now take a moment and remember that we are the human animal. Although we do have the unique traits of compassion, conscience, etc., we are still an animal .And natural laws apply to all animals when it comes to survival as a species.
The reason for technology is from understanding mother nature. From looking, learning and planning ahead. How many "man made" items are merely some imitation of natural physical and chemical processes. Technology is bending nature to our will. Our technological infrastructure is our new environment. You can't blame someone for surviving in the new environment. But at the same time how can you stick to the old ways? If you are not prepared to weed the garden, don't complain about the view.
I could go on about what I think the future of human society should be. Funny thing is it has many parallels to MMOG's
.
The thing is though, you think you are very capable. In this environment. If another Ice age did come, would your success in this time translate to success in that time? It's hard to say.
And you talk of will. Imagine the will of someone capable of going without food or water or the bathroom for that long to succeed at some goal. I think that gamers have some primative genes which once were useful, but now only serve to get them into more trouble. I don't think that going back that way is desirable. How else can you explain their genetic make-up in this day and age?
As to the Wolf analogy. I have seen the very thing in a nature documentary. Arguably it could all be bullshit, but bear with me. The wolf in question was a lower male. The alpha bitch made herself available to this male. He got a surprise when the Alpha Dog came back and ran him out of town. This brings up pack politics and whether or not the alpha bitch hadn't intended this all along.
Basically he had to go. Because every time the alpha dog saw him he was in a fight. And of course if the alpha male attacks all the other members follow. Including the alpha female. 
This male went on to found his own territory with his own mate. The end. Kleenex pls.
I know we are an animal. I have seen grown lions as playful as kittens. They are treated well and have all they need. We don't have to lower ourselves to savagery. But I guess some crave it. Because it is to their advantage.
A completely useless waste of space this is. As others have said, it is merely a person's choice.
And you missed one, a 28 yr old korean male died after playing a game 28 hrs straight. Never leaving the computer for more then a few minutes to use the bathroom. He had a choice to stop, as I recall I believe he was in a cybercafe that whole time.
My guess is your nothing more then a forum drama queen starving for attention.
Playing: Not much actively.
Games played: to many to list, been playing MMO's since 2001
--------------------------
Unlike that certain individual you alluded to I am not advocating enforcing my own personal agenda on the world. I am advocating allowing nature to decide. If we did that then our species would naturally evolve into something stronger, smarter and more capable of surviving change. If not then we would die out and nature would start over.
This is the same mechanism that allows you and I to sit at our computers and have this discussion. For millions of years humans evolved and the stronger, smarter and healthier individuals lived to pass on their genes and the weaker, sicker, foolish ones didn't and those genes were removed from the pool. This allowed our species to survive and thrive and now we are actually working evolution in reverse. Our society is getting weaker, dumber and sicker than ever before and yet you say that we should protect everyone and prolong that situation.
In 100 years this planet won't be able to feed its ever growing population. Humans are becoming fatter, dumber and generally unhealthy each passing year. Why? Because we have this misguided notion that every life is worth saving. We cannot rely on technology to continue to offset this imbalance. Eventually technology will falter and then nature will come roaring back free of the restraints placed on it by technology and our society and our species will be put the tests of natural selection again and if we are able to emerge on the other side we will be stronger, healthier and smarter and the cycle will begin anew. Hopefully then we will get it right.
So you think the most intelligent course of action is to do nothing to avoid impending disaster.......
Our population is getting sicker & dumber? Could it be that we are only becoming more aware of the illnesses and diseases that plague humans? Could our lifestyles have changed dramatically over a very short period? Could it be that professions have become more demanding requiring greater mental skill? And that existing genetic make-ups no longer cut it?
The notion that every life is valuable was founded for a very good reason. Unfortunately that reason is no longer relevant. Why? because we won. Evolution never stops. To reset the clock is to change the environment. Which is to go back to square one!!
The problem is, if you have superior genes, in the event of technological infrastructure failure you're survival is influenced far more by chance. Surely it is better to maintain the current climate and simply change social views rationaly. Like China's one child policy. Or being wiser and genetically screening people to avoid possible bad match ups. Rather than "Hopefully then we will get it right." You're talking like life is a video game where you can mash a reset button.
LEAVE NATURAL SELECTION ALONE!!! YOU'RE LUCKY SHE EVEN...performed...for you?
Anyway.
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
On we sweep with threshing oar, our only goal will be the western shore."
30-40 million online gamers and like 8 deaths.
/end
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
I can live with those chances. Of course I'm not one to neglect eating or breathing.
'Nuff said.
Warning texts wont help, morons die anyways. You just have to take your own responsibility.
Keep an eye on your kids and yourself for that matter. There are parental systems in most games where you can put how many hours a day anyone can play, use them.
Some people can missuse anything, drugs, alcohol, food, games and so on. A warning sign never helped anyone to quit smoking or drink less and it wont help any gamer either.
It is your life to do as you choose with, that is called freedom. And as a parent it is you responsibility that your kids dont become criminals or play to much. I know that americans are happy about stupid warning labels but they have never and will never help anyone for anything.
People know that playing 48 hours without sleep is not good, or they are so stupid that they cant read anyways.
I am certainly not saying that when faced with a disaster that we stand around doing nothing. Of course we will try and protect ourselves. Self preservation is one of the key elements of evolution. We can't evolve if we aren't here.
What I'm saying is that only the strong and smart and healthy should survive to make the species viable in the long run. If a tornado hits near a group of 10 people and 8 of them run and get out of the way (smart) and 2 decide to stand there and admire it (dumb) then those two are gonna die and their death improves the overall population. Before they died the population consisted of 80% smart people and 20% dumb. After the tornado came now 100% of the population are smart, at least when it comes to knowing that tornadoes are not your friend.
So to the game players that forget to take care of themselves, their deaths make us stronger as a species. Why would I want to expend energy saving them from their own stupidity and increasing their numbers. If you find a rotten piece of fruit in the basket do you leave it in there? No you throw it out or the whole basket will be ruined.
As for technology I think that as a whole is it both a blessing and a curse. Technology for the most part works against nature. It allows us to do things that we are not able to do naturally or allows us to resist natural forces that would otherwise affect us. However when that technology fails we are completely and utterly helpless. Our society is amazingly fragile and one little burp in our technology can cause chaos. I think that technology should support our lives rather than completely defining our lives. We need to learn to live without technology as well as with it.
I like the fact that I can hop on the computer and communicate with people all over the world. However I also know that it is not a replacement for direct human contact which is vital for a healthy balanced existence.
As for mashing the reset button, yea mother nature loves doing that. It has happened millions of times. Sometimes mother nature just gives up and starts again. Well over 90% of the species that have ever lived on this planet are gone. Why did they vanish? Natural selection. They cannot adapt to a changing world and they die. Evolution is not always a slow process. There are massive spikes in evolutionary change driven by extreme rapid change whether that be climate, disease or famine. Those spikes cause more extinctions than not because rapid change is harder to adapt too than gradual change.
The plague wiped out nearly two thirds of Europe's population. The people that survived were the strong ones with resistance to the disease or the intelligence to know that it was caused by living in filth with rats (who were infested with fleas) and avoided those conditions. The plague thinned our herd leaving it stronger. It happens all time time. The swine flu is the latest example of this. It will kill off lots of people with weak immune systems or the already sick. Science will try and fight it with drugs and that will just cause it to evolve to resist the drugs.
Medicine against things like a virus actually accelerate its evolution. Think about it. A population of a virus is like any other organism. They have weak individuals and strong ones. Evolution happens at a gradual pace in that population but there are massive spikes that cause rapid evolutionary changes. So science identifies a drug that kills off most of the virus and they start giving it out to people and it works. The virus dies off but not all of it. Some of the virus are resistant to the drugs and now they are the only ones left. So what happens? The strong virus population multiplies and soon you have a whole new population of virus that are immune to the drugs that worked before. The virus evolved and became stronger because our medicine removed the weak individuals from the population. Its a never ending cycle. The swine flu bug is just the latest to evolve because of past treatments of the common flu. It will continue to happen as long as we keep driving it.
Just let nature take its course. Its not always a pleasant thought but it is for the greater good.
That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot.
There is a significantly larger number of people who die every year from drug and alchohol abuse. That doesn't mean it's ok. But video game addictions is small potatoes in comparison. That is my opinion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
Orly?
From the university of utah.
learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/genetics/
Next.
You can slap up whatever references you want, you still completely avoided and failed to respond to my point. Genetic disposition NEVER forces someone to use something the first time. That is ALWAYS a choice.
Honestly, this is just more of the "It's someone else's fault" rubbish that has been littering society and the media for a while now. "Johny played video games for 34 hours straight and died, but it can't be his fault, it must be the video game makers fault, or the computer manufacturers fault! We must find someone else to blame!"
No. It is his fault, and solely his fault. People really need to learn how to take responsibility for their own stupid actions and stop trying to lay blame on everyone else. Yeash.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
Orly?
From the university of utah.
learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/genetics/
Next.
You can slap up whatever references you want, you still completely avoided and failed to respond to my point. Genetic disposition NEVER forces someone to use something the first time. That is ALWAYS a choice.
Honestly, this is just more of the "It's someone else's fault" rubbish that has been littering society and the media for a while now. "Johny played video games for 34 hours straight and died, but it can't be his fault, it must be the video game makers fault, or the computer manufacturers fault! We must find someone else to blame!"
No. It is his fault, and solely his fault. People really need to learn how to take responsibility for their own stupid actions and stop trying to lay blame on everyone else. Yeash.
hey AB dont waste your breath on this one
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
Genetic coding doesn't force someone to do anything the first time. The first time someone does something, it is their choice and their choice alone. If they never tried the harmful thing in the first place, they would never be addicted. In the end, it is still their fault, and only their fault.
Orly?
From the university of utah.
learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/genetics/
Next.
You can slap up whatever references you want, you still completely avoided and failed to respond to my point. Genetic disposition NEVER forces someone to use something the first time. That is ALWAYS a choice.
Honestly, this is just more of the "It's someone else's fault" rubbish that has been littering society and the media for a while now. "Johny played video games for 34 hours straight and died, but it can't be his fault, it must be the video game makers fault, or the computer manufacturers fault! We must find someone else to blame!"
No. It is his fault, and solely his fault. People really need to learn how to take responsibility for their own stupid actions and stop trying to lay blame on everyone else. Yeash.
hey AB dont waste your breath on this one
Yeah you are probably right. It's always a strange feeling knowing someone is never going to get it, yet still feeling compelled to knock common sense into them anyway.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.