8 ms·

But this is authoritarian. Why should the government control how I manage my time? I'm pretty sure this site would be pretty outraged if the government decided

But this is authoritarian. Why should the government control how I manage my time? I'm pretty sure this site would be pretty outraged if the government decided we could only code 3 hours a week. And please don't use the "but coding is constructive!1!" argument. A good use of time is defined by whoever spends it, not whatever someone else's idea of wasting time is. As a case in point, playing hours of Splitgate has kept me sane during the pandemic as a college student locked in a room for 1.8 years. I meet on Discord with friends and discuss topics while playing. I've made more friends gaming than physically in the past year. That's pretty constructive if you ask me.

yuy910616 5y ago
People can't be left to their own accord.
- ericmay 5y ago
  If you believe this then surely you'd want less government since you can't leave these people to their own accord and also making decisions.
  - yuy910616 5y ago
    there is a strong correlation between strong government and higher GDP. Weak economies are weak because of corrupt and weak government. So that would be my case for government action - collectively or through a good dictator. Your logic seems good but is removed from history and reality.
    - analognoise 5y ago
      Why is GDP implicitly the thing we should maximize? It's like this weird unstated thing everyone agrees on without critical examination. I'd rather have less GDP and no CCP; I'd also "sacrifice" max GDP for universal healthcare, fewer wars, jail reform...all kinds of things.
      - ericmay 5y ago
        Yea. Also if you want to look at GDP - US is #1. And on a per-capita basis we're just below Norway and ahead of countries like Denmark and the UK. Personally I'd propose things like longevity, obesity, parks per-capita, household wealth, etc.
        analognoise 5y ago
        Yeah infant mortality, press freedom, corruption index, childhood educational rankings? There are a TON of things I'd put over GDP.
        yuy910616 5y ago
        And if you look at the past 200 years that we've made large progress towards all the things you mentioned, with each of those accomplishments have been enabled by...GDP growth
      - yuy910616 5y ago
        GDP is the thing we should measure because without it, you can't have all the things you mentioned - you might be able to not start wars but you still need a strong army. To say that money isn't everything is already a luxury
        analognoise 5y ago
        I never said it wasn't important, but we literally have the largest GDP - we won, game over! And we don't have universal healthcare. It's like we've confused a metric (GDP) with success; we maximized the metric and can't even wake up and realize it's not what we were actually trying to accomplish.
        yuy910616 5y ago
        what is success then? what are you trying to accomplish? I'd argue the best way to accomplish whatever you're thinking about that we should be accomplishing - something that is hard to measure - is by maximizing GDP. Because GDP is correlated with everything you're thinking about accomplishing.
    - ericmay 5y ago
      I'm not sure I'm following your train of thought here. Maybe you can help? You say that people can't be left to the own accord, but then you also want people that you can't trust (leave to their own accord) to be in charge of you and managing a country?
      - yuy910616 5y ago
        Yes, I do think people can't be left to their own accord and some people should be allow to make rules for others. How we determine who those `some people` are is a matter of what we tried already and what was effective. What would you suggest?
        ericmay 5y ago
        I don't really have a good suggestion. I wish I did. I kind of believe in the "democracy is the worst form of government except all of the others" statement because it appears to be so. You can probably make better democracies though but they require education and participation. Education you can do at scale, but participation is hard to achieve amongst heterogeneous populations, especially when they're large. IMO that's why we're seeing problems with the U.S. that simply will never resolve. The long-term future is balkanization in some fashion. Either outright via secession or implied via arbitrary restrictions that make certain places undesirable to go to. Contrast that with a country like Iceland where the population is more homogenous and the democracy seems to work better. And it's not a race thing so much as a belief/culture thing. Just in case someone mistakenly believe that was what I was implying, it's not. But I do think it's hard to reconcile saying that you fundamentally mistrust people but then you still want to give them power to make rules for you. The safer bet would be to have less or no government in that scenario unless you trust that you can create a process that really weeds out those who are not trustworthy. It's hard to do that too. Even people who are highly credible (scientists, doctors, etc.) often aren't people you would want making rules for you because they're not philosophers...
        yuy910616 5y ago
        I disagree that the safer bet is to have less government - look at the macro picture, things are better than ever as governments are exerting more controls, so there must exist a process of which allows for better prosperity for all by allowing government to modify our behavior. Making rules is a function of government, and government is a function of the collective will of the people. So rules are nothing more that what I, and most of my neighbors, believe how everyone should behave, and the process is ultimately a trial and error; an experiment.
    - Vrondi 5y ago
      Life is about more than GDP, and childhood should be about more than being trained to follow orders.
      - pojzon 5y ago
        This whole discussion is slowly evolving into a discussion about „what it means to be successful in life” and its completely subjective..
actacntact 5y ago
> Why should the government control how I manage my time? It doesn't. Unless you're under 18. > As a case in point Age aside - as this law is worded, Discord wouldn't be restricted, offline games wouldn't be restricted, non-gameplay-as-a-service online gaming like voice-chat DND or P2P fightcade matches wouldn't be restricted, other forms of media aren't restricted, and you still have 3 hrs/week for the restricted subset if you must. I don't see why your stated benefits require a majority of your time to be spent on a gameplay-as-a-service game, so I don't see anything constructive in your life that would be prevented by this law in particular. And it's this law in particular that positivity is being expressed for. In light of the recent (read: ongoing over the past decade+) design trends of gameplay-as-a-service games in East Asia regions, which something like Splitgate doesn't fit the profile for.
birbs 5y ago
The government is controlling how children spend their time. In the U.S., the government mandates a lot about how children spend their time. They need to go to school and they aren’t allowed to buy alcohol or tobacco. Children under 16 aren’t allowed to spend any time driving an automobile, etc.
- rank0 5y ago
  So why can’t you use the same logic to justify any arbitrary regulation? I don’t agree that having SOME laws means that the government should be able to pass ANY law.
  - solatic 5y ago
    To justify any arbitrary regulation imposed on children. No child owns his own life or decision making. Typically parents make most decisions, the government makes some others e.g. mandatory schooling, setting standards that parents most abide by if they don't want their children taken away from them (sufficient food and shelter etc.).
fma 5y ago
I live in the state of Georgia where most of the state belives in the "smaller the government the better". Alcohol sales can't happen during certain hours on Sundays...all because of...wait for it...religion. LOL. Why should the government tell stores & restaurants when they can or cannot sell alcohol? How can the government tell me when I can, or cannot buy/consume alcohol. How is that a benefit to society? Why is it in a country codified for separation of religion and government are they allowed to have this in law?
est 5y ago
> Why should the government control how I manage my time? The government didn't. They just put online-game service providers to the same category as alcohol or drugs.

yuy910616 5y ago

People can't be left to their own accord.

ericmay 5y ago
If you believe this then surely you'd want less government since you can't leave these people to their own accord and also making decisions.
- yuy910616 5y ago
  there is a strong correlation between strong government and higher GDP. Weak economies are weak because of corrupt and weak government. So that would be my case for government action - collectively or through a good dictator. Your logic seems good but is removed from history and reality.
  - analognoise 5y ago
    Why is GDP implicitly the thing we should maximize? It's like this weird unstated thing everyone agrees on without critical examination. I'd rather have less GDP and no CCP; I'd also "sacrifice" max GDP for universal healthcare, fewer wars, jail reform...all kinds of things.
    - ericmay 5y ago
      Yea. Also if you want to look at GDP - US is #1. And on a per-capita basis we're just below Norway and ahead of countries like Denmark and the UK. Personally I'd propose things like longevity, obesity, parks per-capita, household wealth, etc.
      - analognoise 5y ago
        Yeah infant mortality, press freedom, corruption index, childhood educational rankings? There are a TON of things I'd put over GDP.
        yuy910616 5y ago
        And if you look at the past 200 years that we've made large progress towards all the things you mentioned, with each of those accomplishments have been enabled by...GDP growth
    - yuy910616 5y ago
      GDP is the thing we should measure because without it, you can't have all the things you mentioned - you might be able to not start wars but you still need a strong army. To say that money isn't everything is already a luxury
      - analognoise 5y ago
        I never said it wasn't important, but we literally have the largest GDP - we won, game over! And we don't have universal healthcare. It's like we've confused a metric (GDP) with success; we maximized the metric and can't even wake up and realize it's not what we were actually trying to accomplish.
        yuy910616 5y ago
        what is success then? what are you trying to accomplish? I'd argue the best way to accomplish whatever you're thinking about that we should be accomplishing - something that is hard to measure - is by maximizing GDP. Because GDP is correlated with everything you're thinking about accomplishing.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    I'm not sure I'm following your train of thought here. Maybe you can help? You say that people can't be left to the own accord, but then you also want people that you can't trust (leave to their own accord) to be in charge of you and managing a country?
    - yuy910616 5y ago
      Yes, I do think people can't be left to their own accord and some people should be allow to make rules for others. How we determine who those `some people` are is a matter of what we tried already and what was effective. What would you suggest?
      - ericmay 5y ago
        I don't really have a good suggestion. I wish I did. I kind of believe in the "democracy is the worst form of government except all of the others" statement because it appears to be so. You can probably make better democracies though but they require education and participation. Education you can do at scale, but participation is hard to achieve amongst heterogeneous populations, especially when they're large. IMO that's why we're seeing problems with the U.S. that simply will never resolve. The long-term future is balkanization in some fashion. Either outright via secession or implied via arbitrary restrictions that make certain places undesirable to go to. Contrast that with a country like Iceland where the population is more homogenous and the democracy seems to work better. And it's not a race thing so much as a belief/culture thing. Just in case someone mistakenly believe that was what I was implying, it's not. But I do think it's hard to reconcile saying that you fundamentally mistrust people but then you still want to give them power to make rules for you. The safer bet would be to have less or no government in that scenario unless you trust that you can create a process that really weeds out those who are not trustworthy. It's hard to do that too. Even people who are highly credible (scientists, doctors, etc.) often aren't people you would want making rules for you because they're not philosophers...
        yuy910616 5y ago
        I disagree that the safer bet is to have less government - look at the macro picture, things are better than ever as governments are exerting more controls, so there must exist a process of which allows for better prosperity for all by allowing government to modify our behavior. Making rules is a function of government, and government is a function of the collective will of the people. So rules are nothing more that what I, and most of my neighbors, believe how everyone should behave, and the process is ultimately a trial and error; an experiment.
  - Vrondi 5y ago
    Life is about more than GDP, and childhood should be about more than being trained to follow orders.
    - pojzon 5y ago
      This whole discussion is slowly evolving into a discussion about „what it means to be successful in life” and its completely subjective..

actacntact 5y ago

> Why should the government control how I manage my time? It doesn't. Unless you're under 18. > As a case in point Age aside - as this law is worded, Discord wouldn't be restricted, offline games wouldn't be restricted, non-gameplay-as-a-service online gaming like voice-chat DND or P2P fightcade matches wouldn't be restricted, other forms of media aren't restricted, and you still have 3 hrs/week for the restricted subset if you must. I don't see why your stated benefits require a majority of your time to be spent on a gameplay-as-a-service game, so I don't see anything constructive in your life that would be prevented by this law in particular. And it's this law in particular that positivity is being expressed for. In light of the recent (read: ongoing over the past decade+) design trends of gameplay-as-a-service games in East Asia regions, which something like Splitgate doesn't fit the profile for.

birbs 5y ago

The government is controlling how children spend their time. In the U.S., the government mandates a lot about how children spend their time. They need to go to school and they aren’t allowed to buy alcohol or tobacco. Children under 16 aren’t allowed to spend any time driving an automobile, etc.

rank0 5y ago
So why can’t you use the same logic to justify any arbitrary regulation? I don’t agree that having SOME laws means that the government should be able to pass ANY law.
- solatic 5y ago
  To justify any arbitrary regulation imposed on children. No child owns his own life or decision making. Typically parents make most decisions, the government makes some others e.g. mandatory schooling, setting standards that parents most abide by if they don't want their children taken away from them (sufficient food and shelter etc.).

fma 5y ago

I live in the state of Georgia where most of the state belives in the "smaller the government the better". Alcohol sales can't happen during certain hours on Sundays...all because of...wait for it...religion. LOL. Why should the government tell stores & restaurants when they can or cannot sell alcohol? How can the government tell me when I can, or cannot buy/consume alcohol. How is that a benefit to society? Why is it in a country codified for separation of religion and government are they allowed to have this in law?

est 5y ago

> Why should the government control how I manage my time? The government didn't. They just put online-game service providers to the same category as alcohol or drugs.