NCSoft sued over Lineage II being too addidictive

That's because sex is so dangerous in the US that you're not allowed to talk about it :p much less have any warnings about it.
I had visions of some sort of Surgeon General's warning tattoo'd to every woman's inner thigh... ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
You really don't get it, do you? ;)
Depends on what exactly you think I don't get. I DO get that personal responsibility has nearly been destroyed in this country. It's always somebody else's fault; blame the deepest pockets your lawyer can find; celebrate failure; manufacture a medical/psychological definition for anything unpleasant.

OTOH, I freely admit to seeing addiction as nothing more than poor personal choices and don't get terribly impressed by the ivory tower mumbo-jumbo that's popped up to justify those choices so we can pat someone on the back and say, "It's not your fault because we just wrote a page in this here textbook that says you couldn't help yourself because Mommy didn't hug you twice during every full moon." I'm sure you sympathetic types wouldn't approve of such a stance, but so it goes. After all, y'all could write a page in some book to cover why I'm a cold-hearted bastard and then it won't be my fault anymore--I just can't help myself and y'all completely failed me by not "fixing me" sooner. :p
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,223
Depends on what exactly you think I don't get. I DO get that personal responsibility has nearly been destroyed in this country. It's always somebody else's fault; blame the deepest pockets your lawyer can find; celebrate failure; manufacture a medical/psychological definition for anything unpleasant.

OTOH, I freely admit to seeing addiction as nothing more than poor personal choices and don't get terribly impressed by the ivory tower mumbo-jumbo that's popped up to justify those choices so we can pat someone on the back and say, "It's not your fault because we just wrote a page in this here textbook that says you couldn't help yourself because Mommy didn't hug you twice during every full moon." I'm sure you sympathetic types wouldn't approve of such a stance, but so it goes. After all, y'all could write a page in some book to cover why I'm a cold-hearted bastard and then it won't be my fault anymore—I just can't help myself and y'all completely failed me by not "fixing me" sooner. :p

It has nothing to do with sympathy, and I'm neither the sympathetic type nor the opposite.

My interest in helping is not about that.

It's about benefit versus harm.

I think the overall results of not helping is vastly more harmful, than trying to understand why people do this to themselves, and taking actions against it.

It's a huge mistake to confuse these things, and if I truly believed people would be better served by not helping them, then that's the stance I would take.

I have no emotional connection with strangers, anyway.

I lost my sister to drug addiction, and in a way she nearly destroyed our family due to her choices. But in my opinion, she never chose to be an addict. That happened during her youth where you have no way to determine the long term costs of being addicted, and ignorance is really to blame. We're all ignorant. It's just in different ways and she was, simply, very unlucky.

Now, I could take your stance and point the finger and blame my sister - but then I'd have to consider myself a moron. I have no desire to do that.

Believing people start out wanting to do this, and in effect are responsible for their own tragedies, or those they bring upon others - is a point of view I consider incredibly ill-informed - and it's just another kind of ignorance.

That's your choice and you probably think you have the right of it. Whether you're emotionally engaged against helping or not, though, is completely irrelevant - and is of zero interest to me, as far as this debate is concerned.
 
OTOH, I freely admit to seeing addiction as nothing more than poor personal choices and don't get terribly impressed by the ivory tower mumbo-jumbo that's popped up to justify those choices so we can pat someone on the back and say, "It's not your fault because we just wrote a page in this here textbook that says you couldn't help yourself because Mommy didn't hug you twice during every full moon." I'm sure you sympathetic types wouldn't approve of such a stance, but so it goes.

Count me as a "sympathetic type who wouldn't approve of such a stance." Addiction has been long known to be a disorder of choice. Talking as you are, suggests to me you are ignorant of the field.

Take the animal studies. This was 30 years ago or so. A mouse will keep administering drugs to himself despite getting a strong continuous shock, despite starvation with food a short distance away, despite dehydration with water a short distance away. He will keep pressing that key (sort of like an MMO player, ha) until he dies of exhaustion or dehydration or something.

Ok, so you'll say, mice don't have free will. Fair enough. But addiction happens in a part of the brain that has no free will. It's the same part of the brain that the animal research taps: ventral tegmental area and the nucleus acumbens, the "pleasure circuit." We know so much more about this, from the last 20 years of neuroscientific research.

Loss of control is one of the main diagnostic criterion for addiction. "Loss of control" is part of what we mean by the word. So you just sound like a person who has no clue, to me.

Have you ever had a family member with addiction? Anyone who has will tell you it is not so simple as you think.

An alcoholic can't just drink 2 or 3, and then stop. Once the alcohol triggers that part of the midbrain, which is "hooked," it starts focusing on that thing as if it is more important than anything else (like the mouse). So family, friends, hobbies and other interests fade away, the thing starts taking more and giving less, but there's this primitive circuitry in the brain that has gotten fucked up because of the choices that have been made.

So I agree that choice leads you into addiction, like it leads you into all sorts of life problems. But once there, free will is no longer so free.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
884
Location
US
What if "they" (those that become addicts) were 10% of people? 25% 50%? 95%?
Let's see - for gaming I'm thinking maybe a warning at about 5% (something like what all games already have for epilepsy, at least here in the USA). If it's closer to 20% then require something stronger - like a note a startup screen. If it's over 50% then it's time to take the game off the market or start putting major limits on the game, like not letting you play it for more than 4 hours per day.

Other addictive things would require different levels, depending on how much damage they do when addicted. Gambling addiction, for instance, eats a lot more than just time and $12/month.

P.S. I hear that Guild Wars will pester you after two or three hours about how long you are playing.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
8,238
Location
Kansas City
Depends on what exactly you think I don't get. I DO get that personal responsibility has nearly been destroyed in this country. It's always somebody else's fault; blame the deepest pockets your lawyer can find; celebrate failure; manufacture a medical/psychological definition for anything unpleasant.

OTOH, I freely admit to seeing addiction as nothing more than poor personal choices and don't get terribly impressed by the ivory tower mumbo-jumbo that's popped up to justify those choices so we can pat someone on the back and say, "It's not your fault because we just wrote a page in this here textbook that says you couldn't help yourself because Mommy didn't hug you twice during every full moon." I'm sure you sympathetic types wouldn't approve of such a stance, but so it goes. After all, y'all could write a page in some book to cover why I'm a cold-hearted bastard and then it won't be my fault anymore—I just can't help myself and y'all completely failed me by not "fixing me" sooner. :p

You deserve no help since it was your free decision to be a pathetic bastard.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2007
Messages
1,786
"Computer Addiction" is already discussed here as being real.

Most doctors don't know how to draw the line, though, since this phenomenon is just too new for soceity ? soceiety ? oh, damn, I've lost the right spelling.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
You deserve no help since it was your free decision to be a pathetic bastard.
That would then apply to the other addicts that you're so intent on finding excuses for, wouldn't it? But that's totally different, right? No reason to be consistent when there's an insult to be thrown.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
"Computer Addiction" is already discussed here as being real.

Most doctors don't know how to draw the line, though, since this phenomenon is just too new for soceity ? soceiety ? oh, damn, I've lost the right spelling.

"society" Yeah, it's new, but you can find places or people that will treat it. Assuming you have the dough. Example:

http://www.video-game-addiction.org/video-game-addiction-treatment.html

Here's their list of red flags for adults:

Here are a few red flags that may point to a bigger problem:

•Lying about how much time you spend playing computer or video games
•Playing computer or video games results in intense feelings of pleasure or guilt that seem uncontrollable
•Spending more and more time playing video or computer games to get the same enjoyment
•Withdrawing from friends, family, or your spouse to the point of disrupting family, social, or work life
•Experiencing feelings of anger, depression, moodiness, anxiety, or restlessness when you’re not gaming
•Spending significant sums of money for online services, computer upgrades, or gaming systems
•Thinking obsessively about being on the computer or playing video games even when doing other things

In addition, adults addicted to gaming may have physical symptoms like difficulty sleeping, migraines, back and neck aches, dry eyes, or carpal tunnel syndrome. Video game addicts also may become so preoccupied with earning the high score or reaching the next level that they forget to eat, shower, shave, or take care of basic hygiene. If you are concerned that someone you know may be struggling with video or computer game addiction, the following are a few warning signs you may notice at home or at work.

http://www.video-game-addiction.org/internet-addictions-adults.html
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
884
Location
US
Looks like I'm definitely an addict, i need to hire an attorney asap! ='.'=

Jemy, have you checked this list??
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
5,228
Location
San Diego, Ca
Let's keep this civilized. This is not the P&R forum.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,223
Take the animal studies. This was 30 years ago or so.

Who paid for those studies? I've found the quickest way to predict a "scientific" study's result is to find who paid for it, and (if necessary) where they get their money from.

Regardless of the truth or fiction of their results, any study funded by a man or company that directly profits from findings from that study become suspect. Since I started predicting studies' results based on who funded them, I'm batting 100.

Follow the money, whether for politics, science, or whathaveyou.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
2,742
Location
In the Middle of Nowhere
Who paid for those studies? I've found the quickest way to predict a "scientific" study's result is to find who paid for it, and (if necessary) where they get their money from.

I mentioned some studies from 30 years ago. That's the tip of the iceberg. Research in this area has exploded in the last 20 years. There are innumerable studies from all over the world. If you want to dismiss it all as biased nonsense, be my guest.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
884
Location
US
Studies are overrated :)

Use your perception and learn from your experiences.

That will get you closer to something you can rely on.
 
Studies are overrated :)

There's a fine line between "healthy criticism" and "believing everything to be nonsense", you know ?

Here in Germany there's a saying going like this :

"I don't believe any statistics I haven't counterfeited myself".

The point lies within interpretation. You can interpret statistics of studies in several ways.

And then there are even studies which suppress certain conclusions, just because they "do not fit in". And some studies are "bought", but that i something ou don't see in the first place.

But what YOU do is DISMISS and REJECT *ALL* studies with this tiny remark : "studies are overrated".

Okay, I translate this sentence into CLEAR WORDS, and it sounds like this :

"I only believe what I want to believe [in]".

And that is completely un-scientific !

Any REAL scientist MUST at least take a study INTO REGARDING, because scientifical works is NOT about BELIEVING - and that means to take only the studies one wants to take, because they oh so nicely fit into the re-defined schema, and dismissing all of the others with "studies are overrated" - BUT scientific work consists of TESTING and of probing and of forming even most unpleasant theories out of that !


And of course, now you will say that you haven't said it this way. You'd most certainly try to wriggle your way out of my "translation".

But I'm not stupid. I can see behind the mask - if I want to. I can sense the meaning behind sentences - if I want to.

But most of the time it's just a waste of energy to me.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
And of course, now you will say that you haven't said it this way. You'd most certainly try to wriggle your way out of my "translation".

But I'm not stupid. I can see behind the mask - if I want to. I can sense the meaning behind sentences - if I want to.

:p

Alrik - don't stress yourself out ;)

If you really want to believe in this illusory image you have of me, be my guest. But please don't try to rationalise it - because you will only hurt yourself thinking of ways in which I'm so horrible. It won't QUITE fit together, I guarentee it ;)
 
Last edited:
Studies are overrated :)

Use your perception and learn from your experiences.

That will get you closer to something you can rely on.

That's a bit solipsistic, or at least too either/or for my tastes. Although I highly value my internal experience and use it as a gauge for "truth" all the time, individual perception is notoriously subject to biases and distortions in interpretation, and as addiction progresses, the frontal cortex becomes increasingly unable to function normally, so you get the crazy denial, rationalization, etc., of an addict. The caution against accepting individual experience as a gauge for truth is especially important in this area, because a lot of the important stuff (i.e., alterations in normal brain function) happens outside of conscious awareness, and at a certain point, an addict can no longer think or feel straight.

I do agree that individual studies are over-rated. I shake my head when I see single studies being cited by people to bolster their point of view (e.g., a study about the positive effects of drinking alcohol, championed by heavy drinkers). You should never make too much out of any one, individual study. But that is very different than dismissing decades of research and tens of thousands of studies.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
884
Location
US
I did add a smiley, though ;)

So - while I strongly believe that personal perception is preferable to blindly trusting most studies, I would never discount them as not useful.

Problem is, though, that no matter what you study - there will be a motivation, and whatever premise - it will be flawed, as a human being came up with it.
 
Back
Top Bottom