4 ms·

No but the poster you are replying to is correct. The article is indeed a "shitpiece" against capitalism, it seeks to paint shitty video games that bilk their u

No but the poster you are replying to is correct. The article is indeed a "shitpiece" against capitalism, it seeks to paint shitty video games that bilk their users of money as some sort of phenomenon that unique to capitalism. Therefore we need to enact "Big Government" to solve the problem. The author nor the readers generally could not care less about those affected, their only concern are the delicious condemnations of capitalism. Meanwhile in Venezuela, and the USSR, and Vietnam and North Korea and on and on and on... maybe in some fictional country where humans are perfect robots their ludicrous socialist fantasy is possible, just not in the real world.

Retric 8y ago
I don't agree with the article's presentation, but the idea might not be inherently worthless. Gambling which abstractly seems rather harmless has been banned. So, some taking a hard look at highly additive gamely seems reasonable IMO. Edited: I put drugs in a similar category, but I can see people disagreeing with that.
- ManFromUranus 8y ago
  I agree that gambling is indeed bad, but gambling is not some sort of outgrowth of capitalism. You do not need captialism to gamble and one does not beget the other. The "game" makers are simply bad people exploiting others. These bad people would simply be bad in a different way in a socialist country.
  - Retric 8y ago
    Fair point. However, there are a bunch of complex laws in the US around gambling and gambling as a business is often banned where doing the same things as individuals is more often legal. Old but interesting: http://fortune.com/2011/02/15/was-my-sports-bet-legal/ http://fortune.com/2011/02/15/was-my-sports-bet-legal/ Which I think get's into the same incentives as these games. If the house get's a cut of from poker players without risks they have reason to promote addiction. On the other hand friends playing for bubble gum can enjoy betting without meaningful downsides. I don't think their are clear cut answers, but special regulations for companies due to the nature of capitalism has precedent in the US.
    - ManFromUranus 8y ago
      I think that the danger is: you make a law to protect idiots from their own stupidity and end up breaking normal business activity somehow, or creating a regulatory environment that's a pain in the ass for entrepreneurs and whatnot.
      - musage 8y ago
        > protect idiots from their own stupidity It's not idiocy, it's vulnerability, and it's not the magic result of "their stupidity", but of exploitation. Why should people who are either so useless they have to prey on others, or so fucked in the head that they do it even though they could do something useful, be protected?
rtikulit 8y ago
Even if you abhor the remedies suggested in the article, it is still true that marketers in general are trying very hard to run ahead of the average person's cognitive defences against exploitation. Given that, much of the discussion in the article is interesting and useful (and by that I don't mean "correct".)
- ManFromUranus 8y ago
  The problems cited by the article are real, and the game makers are shitty people with bad motives. Unfortunately neither government (nor anyone) can make the world idiot proof, sometimes people have to learn from their own mistakes.
andrepd 8y ago
On your points: the shady and unethical practices by video games companies that the article points are indeed direct consequences of the reward model of capitalism, in that the only variable that seeks to be maximised is profit, irrespective of any other concerns such as ethics, morality, general social good, etc. Second, of course you just had to come on a meaningless tangent about "USSR, North Korea, bla blah it doesn't work in practice", as if any criticism of capitalism could be dismissed by the magical arguments "well if you don't like it you can just move to korea you commie!" and "it doesn't work in practice, everyone who advocates for socialism is a deluded naive child".
- gimmeDatCheddar 8y ago
  "everyone who advocates for socialism is a deluded naive child" glad we could agree on something
- ManFromUranus 8y ago
  There are no thieves or bad actors in socialist utopias? Of course there are. Socialism doesn't work now and never will work given human nature. Face it: bad people exist and they will do bad things in whatever context they find themselves in. You are just complaining about the ones you see in this context. However they would just be a different kind of bad actor in a socialist context.
  - UncleSlacky 8y ago
    "To look at people in capitalist society and conclude that human nature is egoism, is like looking at people in a factory where pollution is destroying their lungs and saying that it is human nature to cough." - Andrew Collier In any case, why should society encourage qualities like greed and selfishness?
    - ManFromUranus 8y ago
      "Society" does not encourage greed or selfishness, nor does capitalism. I'll wager that you don't actually care about those things, that you only care about other people having more than you. You are simply wrapping your "concerns" in moral language to make it seem like some sort of altruistic concern. However, you already have more than most people on earth I would imagine, you can already give your money away to the poor. I'll eat my socks if that's actually what you do though. Are you greedy are you selfish? No, just a normal person.

Retric 8y ago

I don't agree with the article's presentation, but the idea might not be inherently worthless. Gambling which abstractly seems rather harmless has been banned. So, some taking a hard look at highly additive gamely seems reasonable IMO. Edited: I put drugs in a similar category, but I can see people disagreeing with that.

ManFromUranus 8y ago
I agree that gambling is indeed bad, but gambling is not some sort of outgrowth of capitalism. You do not need captialism to gamble and one does not beget the other. The "game" makers are simply bad people exploiting others. These bad people would simply be bad in a different way in a socialist country.
- Retric 8y ago
  Fair point. However, there are a bunch of complex laws in the US around gambling and gambling as a business is often banned where doing the same things as individuals is more often legal. Old but interesting: http://fortune.com/2011/02/15/was-my-sports-bet-legal/ http://fortune.com/2011/02/15/was-my-sports-bet-legal/ Which I think get's into the same incentives as these games. If the house get's a cut of from poker players without risks they have reason to promote addiction. On the other hand friends playing for bubble gum can enjoy betting without meaningful downsides. I don't think their are clear cut answers, but special regulations for companies due to the nature of capitalism has precedent in the US.
  - ManFromUranus 8y ago
    I think that the danger is: you make a law to protect idiots from their own stupidity and end up breaking normal business activity somehow, or creating a regulatory environment that's a pain in the ass for entrepreneurs and whatnot.
    - musage 8y ago
      > protect idiots from their own stupidity It's not idiocy, it's vulnerability, and it's not the magic result of "their stupidity", but of exploitation. Why should people who are either so useless they have to prey on others, or so fucked in the head that they do it even though they could do something useful, be protected?

rtikulit 8y ago

Even if you abhor the remedies suggested in the article, it is still true that marketers in general are trying very hard to run ahead of the average person's cognitive defences against exploitation. Given that, much of the discussion in the article is interesting and useful (and by that I don't mean "correct".)

ManFromUranus 8y ago
The problems cited by the article are real, and the game makers are shitty people with bad motives. Unfortunately neither government (nor anyone) can make the world idiot proof, sometimes people have to learn from their own mistakes.

andrepd 8y ago

On your points: the shady and unethical practices by video games companies that the article points are indeed direct consequences of the reward model of capitalism, in that the only variable that seeks to be maximised is profit, irrespective of any other concerns such as ethics, morality, general social good, etc. Second, of course you just had to come on a meaningless tangent about "USSR, North Korea, bla blah it doesn't work in practice", as if any criticism of capitalism could be dismissed by the magical arguments "well if you don't like it you can just move to korea you commie!" and "it doesn't work in practice, everyone who advocates for socialism is a deluded naive child".

gimmeDatCheddar 8y ago
"everyone who advocates for socialism is a deluded naive child" glad we could agree on something
ManFromUranus 8y ago
There are no thieves or bad actors in socialist utopias? Of course there are. Socialism doesn't work now and never will work given human nature. Face it: bad people exist and they will do bad things in whatever context they find themselves in. You are just complaining about the ones you see in this context. However they would just be a different kind of bad actor in a socialist context.
- UncleSlacky 8y ago
  "To look at people in capitalist society and conclude that human nature is egoism, is like looking at people in a factory where pollution is destroying their lungs and saying that it is human nature to cough." - Andrew Collier In any case, why should society encourage qualities like greed and selfishness?
  - ManFromUranus 8y ago
    "Society" does not encourage greed or selfishness, nor does capitalism. I'll wager that you don't actually care about those things, that you only care about other people having more than you. You are simply wrapping your "concerns" in moral language to make it seem like some sort of altruistic concern. However, you already have more than most people on earth I would imagine, you can already give your money away to the poor. I'll eat my socks if that's actually what you do though. Are you greedy are you selfish? No, just a normal person.