This seems hard to enforce unless backed by criminal penalties for cheating. It seems like it would be too easy to just put a picture or video of someone else's face in front of a camera.
I presume the system can distinguish between real people from photos and videos. Your game ID is most likely tracked too.
I like the system to stop people from over playing too much video game. It's just not healthy.
I don't think people should be protected from themselves unless they want it.
I'm completely for programs for people in need of help but shouldn't they decide how much time is "enough?"
Then again, China has a different culture so who knows what's considered acceptable there.
Absolutely not, if we went this way, some people with gambling addictions would just buy endless lootboxes, as they are unchecked gambling, and in the end, they would end up being taken advantage of by cooperate greed, and we would be expected to sit on the sidelines and say "Well it's their choice"
Some already do, and it has nothing to do with being taken advantage of. The source of the issue is the person's lack of self-control, not the availability of lootboxes, and that is what must be resolved. Failing to treat the source of the problem will simply result in limited lootboxes being replaced with other chance-based purchases.
Ok, that is a fair point.
But, at the end of the day, we shouldn't just sit ideally by and be dismissive about the situation, trying to say "Well it's their choice"
The first step is understanding that some people do not have control, and then working towards how to handle that situation properly.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
This seems hard to enforce unless backed by criminal penalties for cheating. It seems like it would be too easy to just put a picture or video of someone else's face in front of a camera.
I presume the system can distinguish between real people from photos and videos. Your game ID is most likely tracked too.
I like the system to stop people from over playing too much video game. It's just not healthy.
I don't think people should be protected from themselves unless they want it.
I'm completely for programs for people in need of help but shouldn't they decide how much time is "enough?"
Then again, China has a different culture so who knows what's considered acceptable there.
Absolutely not, if we went this way, some people with gambling addictions would just buy endless lootboxes, as they are unchecked gambling, and in the end, they would end up being taken advantage of by cooperate greed, and we would be expected to sit on the sidelines and say "Well it's their choice"
Some already do, and it has nothing to do with being taken advantage of. The source of the issue is the person's lack of self-control, not the availability of lootboxes, and that is what must be resolved. Failing to treat the source of the problem will simply result in limited lootboxes being replaced with other chance-based purchases.
Ok, that is a fair point.
But, at the end of the day, we shouldn't just sit ideally by and be dismissive about the situation, trying to say "Well it's their choice"
The first step is understanding that some people do not have control, and then working towards how to handle that situation properly.
Society has taken that step. Gamblers Anonymous is specifically devoted to those that acknowledge they can't control their chance-based purchases and seek help for that. This is how the situation is properly handled.
Those that don't acknowledge they have an issue can't be helped as they are not yet receptive to their need for help to overcome it.
Any without the problem should to be left alone to do as they will.
Those personally not affected that wish to take a more active role in supporting those persons seeking help can likely help out GA through donations.
This seems hard to enforce unless backed by criminal penalties for cheating. It seems like it would be too easy to just put a picture or video of someone else's face in front of a camera.
I presume the system can distinguish between real people from photos and videos. Your game ID is most likely tracked too.
I like the system to stop people from over playing too much video game. It's just not healthy.
I don't think people should be protected from themselves unless they want it.
I'm completely for programs for people in need of help but shouldn't they decide how much time is "enough?"
Then again, China has a different culture so who knows what's considered acceptable there.
Absolutely not, if we went this way, some people with gambling addictions would just buy endless lootboxes, as they are unchecked gambling, and in the end, they would end up being taken advantage of by cooperate greed, and we would be expected to sit on the sidelines and say "Well it's their choice"
Some already do, and it has nothing to do with being taken advantage of. The source of the issue is the person's lack of self-control, not the availability of lootboxes, and that is what must be resolved. Failing to treat the source of the problem will simply result in limited lootboxes being replaced with other chance-based purchases.
Ok, that is a fair point.
But, at the end of the day, we shouldn't just sit ideally by and be dismissive about the situation, trying to say "Well it's their choice"
The first step is understanding that some people do not have control, and then working towards how to handle that situation properly.
Society has taken that step. Gamblers Anonymous is specifically devoted to those that acknowledge they can't control their chance-based purchases and seek help for that. This is how the situation is properly handled.
Those that don't acknowledge they have an issue can't be helped as they are not yet receptive to their need for help to overcome it.
Any without the problem should to be left alone to do as they will.
Those personally not affected that wish to take a more active role in supporting those persons seeking help can likely help out GA through donations.
No, it starts with society realizing that something like a LootBox is Gambling, and preys upon people with gambling addictions. That is where it really starts.
Then things like lootboxes get placed under a nations federal gambling commission, to ensure safe distribution of the product, and follow the same rules as other chance based gambling games in their nation.
Ideally, if the game company wants to maintain an honest business transition, they would embrace this, so that the people that can handle gambling Safely, still get as much lootbox as they want, and the people that can't, get the help they need, or at the very least, much like how bars and casinos need to be responsible and cut people off who are being irresponsibly or uncontrollably, a Video game should have the same responsibly, if they do not want to take that responsibility, then they should not sell that product, simple as that.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
No, it starts with society realizing that something like a LootBox is Gambling, and preys upon people with gambling addictions. That is where it really starts.
Then things like lootboxes get placed under a nations federal gambling commission, to ensure safe distribution of the product, and follow the same rules as other chance based gambling games in their nation.
LOL, Talk about brainwashed, do you really think any government's that allow gambling really care about anything except the revenue?
Hehe safe distribution....man, either support the nanny state or the peoples freedom to choose for themselves.
This wishy-washy make a few rules, but let me do SOME bad things but not TOO many....hehe so much hypocrisy.
Set a legal age of consent, then let people do what they want. But do not pretend like you are protecting people while raking in billions from these "regulated activities".
Same thing as smoking and drinking, governments know how much it costs and harms, but as long as they can tax the crap out of those industries, they will not do more than that.
All so much BS, see how much we, the government, can tax/regulate and control things, and still not piss off too many people. That's where the only line is. Not how many people get hurt or all the other BS.
No, it starts with society realizing that something like a LootBox is Gambling, and preys upon people with gambling addictions. That is where it really starts.
Then things like lootboxes get placed under a nations federal gambling commission, to ensure safe distribution of the product, and follow the same rules as other chance based gambling games in their nation.
LOL, Talk about brainwashed, do you really think any government's that allow gambling really care about anything except the revenue?
Hehe safe distribution....man, either support the nanny state or the peoples freedom to choose for themselves.
This wishy-washy make a few rules, but let me do SOME bad things but not TOO many....hehe so much hypocrisy.
Set a legal age of consent, then let people do what they want. But do not pretend like you are protecting people while raking in billions from these "regulated activities".
Same thing as smoking and drinking, governments know how much it costs and harms, but as long as they can tax the crap out of those industries, they will not do more than that.
All so much BS, see how much we, the government, can tax/regulate and control things, and still not piss off too many people. That's where the only line is. Not how many people get hurt or all the other BS.
This is just a tune-up for what's to come. The slow bleed of liberty and individual rights into a matrix of a kind.
No, it starts with society realizing that something like a LootBox is Gambling, and preys upon people with gambling addictions. That is where it really starts.
Then things like lootboxes get placed under a nations federal gambling commission, to ensure safe distribution of the product, and follow the same rules as other chance based gambling games in their nation.
LOL, Talk about brainwashed, do you really think any government's that allow gambling really care about anything except the revenue?
Since they don't get any more or less income than they would from other transactions, and as far as regulations go, it's all a flat fee, yes.
Unless you think all regulation is evil bad, and just there for government bankroll.
Because I am sure Drivers License is really all about profit, because you know that 30 bucks every 5 years, and the test to make sure you still know what the fuck to do while driving 2 tons of steel at fatal speeds, must be such a bankroll for them.
Or maybe when you see that Weights and Measure stamp on the gas Pump, your first thought is the government is looking to make bankroll on gas and deprive your freedoms, and not that they are making sure that if this pump says you got a gallon of gas, you got a gallon of gas.
I hate to break this to you, but there are a lot of things the government has had to do to protect people, because private sector would gladly kill you for some minimal profit, that is why we have the FDA, to make sure they are not still putting lead in your canned goods.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I hate to break this to you, but there are a lot of things the government has had to do to protect people, because private sector would gladly kill you for some minimal profit, that is why we have the FDA, to make sure they are not still putting lead in your canned goods.
I think historically it can be shown that a person is more likely to be killed by their own government than a foreign government or private entity. That seems to be the track record of the 20th century.
I agree with your post - government regulation is necessary and good; however, government is also incredibly evil and must be watched at all times.
Ok.. yah.. fair point..
It's a balance game..
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I hate to break this to you, but there are a lot of things the government has had to do to protect people, because private sector would gladly kill you for some minimal profit, that is why we have the FDA, to make sure they are not still putting lead in your canned goods.
I think historically it can be shown that a person is more likely to be killed by their own government than a foreign government or private entity. That seems to be the track record of the 20th century.
I agree with your post - government regulation is necessary and good; however, government is also incredibly evil and must be watched at all times.
This is heavily dependent on which governments you're talking about. I would expect that an outright majority of the people killed by a government in recorded human history were communist governments killing their own citizens. But if you exclude communist governments from the tally, I'd expect that the number of people killed in wars would probably exceed the number killed the number of people killed by their own government. Of course, historically, a large fraction of the people "killed in wars" died of various natural diseases, not bullet or sword wounds.
I hate to break this to you, but there are a lot of things the government has had to do to protect people, because private sector would gladly kill you for some minimal profit, that is why we have the FDA, to make sure they are not still putting lead in your canned goods.
I think historically it can be shown that a person is more likely to be killed by their own government than a foreign government or private entity. That seems to be the track record of the 20th century.
I agree with your post - government regulation is necessary and good; however, government is also incredibly evil and must be watched at all times.
That's why you have to have a government that answers to the people, not the other way around. Any government of any kind will eventually take over everything, because nothing is perfect and there are always troubling times (weather, economy, etc.). The worst thing is when people running a government start to think "if only we can make people do what we want, then we can make everything perfect." If they can they will, and the end result is far from "perfect."
Some here seem to vastly overestimate how 'free' things were in the past. While the tech for surveillance grows and grows, your storied freedom was more of a legend. Really only worked for hiding by obscurity.
Of course it's true that it pays to watch the Chinese government's activities, as they can most easily put these things into use and thus lead the way.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
This seems hard to enforce unless backed by criminal penalties for cheating. It seems like it would be too easy to just put a picture or video of someone else's face in front of a camera.
I presume the system can distinguish between real people from photos and videos. Your game ID is most likely tracked too.
I like the system to stop people from over playing too much video game. It's just not healthy.
I don't think people should be protected from themselves unless they want it.
I'm completely for programs for people in need of help but shouldn't they decide how much time is "enough?"
Then again, China has a different culture so who knows what's considered acceptable there.
Absolutely not, if we went this way, some people with gambling addictions would just buy endless lootboxes, as they are unchecked gambling, and in the end, they would end up being taken advantage of by cooperate greed, and we would be expected to sit on the sidelines and say "Well it's their choice"
Some already do, and it has nothing to do with being taken advantage of. The source of the issue is the person's lack of self-control, not the availability of lootboxes, and that is what must be resolved. Failing to treat the source of the problem will simply result in limited lootboxes being replaced with other chance-based purchases.
Ok, that is a fair point.
But, at the end of the day, we shouldn't just sit ideally by and be dismissive about the situation, trying to say "Well it's their choice"
The first step is understanding that some people do not have control, and then working towards how to handle that situation properly.
Society has taken that step. Gamblers Anonymous is specifically devoted to those that acknowledge they can't control their chance-based purchases and seek help for that. This is how the situation is properly handled.
Those that don't acknowledge they have an issue can't be helped as they are not yet receptive to their need for help to overcome it.
Any without the problem should to be left alone to do as they will.
Those personally not affected that wish to take a more active role in supporting those persons seeking help can likely help out GA through donations.
No, it starts with society realizing that something like a LootBox is Gambling, and preys upon people with gambling addictions. That is where it really starts.
Then things like lootboxes get placed under a nations federal gambling commission, to ensure safe distribution of the product, and follow the same rules as other chance based gambling games in their nation.
Ideally, if the game company wants to maintain an honest business transition, they would embrace this, so that the people that can handle gambling Safely, still get as much lootbox as they want, and the people that can't, get the help they need, or at the very least, much like how bars and casinos need to be responsible and cut people off who are being irresponsibly or uncontrollably, a Video game should have the same responsibly, if they do not want to take that responsibility, then they should not sell that product, simple as that.
Then it will be a non-starter, as society does little to constrain addictions that are much more harmful overall than gambling.
The government doesn't adequately control the safe distribution of anything. People get alcohol they shouldn't, cigarettes they shouldn't, guns they shouldn't...
If you think they can keep chance-based purchases away from gambling addicts, you're fooling yourself. They don't even do it now with the gambling the government already has direct control over such as lotteries and scratch tickets.
Unlike intoxication that has visible cues for bar and casino staff to act on, there is no such indicator for gambling. To know if someone is gambling excessively you'd need access to their financial information, which I don't see happening.
Aside from that, it does absolutely nothing to address the root cause of the issue, the inability for some to control their chance-based purchases. Trying to make it harder to satisfy addiction only makes the addict work harder for their satisfaction.
Comments
But, at the end of the day, we shouldn't just sit ideally by and be dismissive about the situation, trying to say "Well it's their choice"
The first step is understanding that some people do not have control, and then working towards how to handle that situation properly.
Society has taken that step. Gamblers Anonymous is specifically devoted to those that acknowledge they can't control their chance-based purchases and seek help for that. This is how the situation is properly handled.
Those that don't acknowledge they have an issue can't be helped as they are not yet receptive to their need for help to overcome it.
Any without the problem should to be left alone to do as they will.
Those personally not affected that wish to take a more active role in supporting those persons seeking help can likely help out GA through donations.
Was reading google and I think the limit is 90 minutes a day.
Then things like lootboxes get placed under a nations federal gambling commission, to ensure safe distribution of the product, and follow the same rules as other chance based gambling games in their nation.
Ideally, if the game company wants to maintain an honest business transition, they would embrace this, so that the people that can handle gambling Safely, still get as much lootbox as they want, and the people that can't, get the help they need, or at the very least, much like how bars and casinos need to be responsible and cut people off who are being irresponsibly or uncontrollably, a Video game should have the same responsibly, if they do not want to take that responsibility, then they should not sell that product, simple as that.
Hehe safe distribution....man, either support the nanny state or the peoples freedom to choose for themselves.
This wishy-washy make a few rules, but let me do SOME bad things but not TOO many....hehe so much hypocrisy.
Set a legal age of consent, then let people do what they want. But do not pretend like you are protecting people while raking in billions from these "regulated activities".
Same thing as smoking and drinking, governments know how much it costs and harms, but as long as they can tax the crap out of those industries, they will not do more than that.
All so much BS, see how much we, the government, can tax/regulate and control things, and still not piss off too many people. That's where the only line is. Not how many people get hurt or all the other BS.
The slow bleed of liberty and individual rights into a matrix of a kind.
Once upon a time....
Unless you think all regulation is evil bad, and just there for government bankroll.
Because I am sure Drivers License is really all about profit, because you know that 30 bucks every 5 years, and the test to make sure you still know what the fuck to do while driving 2 tons of steel at fatal speeds, must be such a bankroll for them.
Or maybe when you see that Weights and Measure stamp on the gas Pump, your first thought is the government is looking to make bankroll on gas and deprive your freedoms, and not that they are making sure that if this pump says you got a gallon of gas, you got a gallon of gas.
I hate to break this to you, but there are a lot of things the government has had to do to protect people, because private sector would gladly kill you for some minimal profit, that is why we have the FDA, to make sure they are not still putting lead in your canned goods.
It's a balance game..
The worst thing is when people running a government start to think "if only we can make people do what we want, then we can make everything perfect." If they can they will, and the end result is far from "perfect."
Once upon a time....
Of course it's true that it pays to watch the Chinese government's activities, as they can most easily put these things into use and thus lead the way.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Then it will be a non-starter, as society does little to constrain addictions that are much more harmful overall than gambling.
The government doesn't adequately control the safe distribution of anything. People get alcohol they shouldn't, cigarettes they shouldn't, guns they shouldn't...
If you think they can keep chance-based purchases away from gambling addicts, you're fooling yourself. They don't even do it now with the gambling the government already has direct control over such as lotteries and scratch tickets.
Unlike intoxication that has visible cues for bar and casino staff to act on, there is no such indicator for gambling. To know if someone is gambling excessively you'd need access to their financial information, which I don't see happening.
Aside from that, it does absolutely nothing to address the root cause of the issue, the inability for some to control their chance-based purchases. Trying to make it harder to satisfy addiction only makes the addict work harder for their satisfaction.
External measures don't resolve internal issues.