Slashdot Mirror

That's right, by the Government! It was the government who originally created the telco monopoly, and now they're "saving" us by giving us deregulation. It's been said that "The government is good at one thing... it knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say 'See, if it weren't for the government you wouldn't be able to walk.'"

--

Well, consider Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. While entertainment certainly doesn't come into play with physiological and safety needs (your examples of the homeless person and the earthquake victim, respectively,) once one reaches the third and subsequent level of the hierarchy, the value of entertainment can be quite high. Bear with me on this one.

Consider, for a moment, that your basic physiological and safety needs are met. You live in a permanent domicile, you have a steady job, and you are in no forseeable danger of losing your physiological or safety needs. Thus, you are free to pursue the remaining three needs: Love/Affection/Belongingness, Esteem, and Self-Actualization needs. For various reasons, not many people ever succeed in pursuing all three of the above. Some people manage to find love, but never chase their dreams and opportunities. Others have powerful personalities and vast success, but lack anyone to share this with. Even more people live day to day, alone, without achievement or pride, going through the motions of life.

I see entertainment as a means of filling these gaps. People who couldn't run a mile without collapsing regularly watch professional sports, absorbing the abilites of the atheletes in place of their own inadequacies. People watch "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" and go window shopping to fill percieved shortcomings in their own career achievements. People purchase self-affirming Chicken-Soup-style books and buy into things like the Spice Girls' "Girl Power" to artificially bolster their own lacking self-esteem. All of the above are forms of entertainment; entertainment allows us to feel better about who we are.

In addition to making us feel better about who we are, though, entertainment can provide a very real impetus for self-improvement. Kids watch Michael Jordan play basketball and set themselves to become professional atheletes. Some even succeed; many others gain a valuable appreciation for physical conditioning and personal health that lasts their entire lives. People go to the theater, the opera, or the films to introduce new thoughts to their minds, and to help themselves grow intellectually. People visit singles bars and clubs searching for friendship and love; quite often, they find it. Entertainment, beyond being a simple diversion, becomes the very means for delving deeper into these last three levels of need.

Computer entertainment brings exciting new possibilites. One can play Quake with people you've known for years but never met in person. One becomes capable of flying, space exploration, and gravity-defying acrobatics without having to leave one's seat. One can even make a fulfilling career out of computer entertainment, acting as a developer, guide, advice columnist, commentator, or any number of things. Computer entertainment provides a degree and depth of interaction that surpasses all other forms of entertainment except face-to-face interaction with another human being.

Yes, the applications for computers are wide-ranging, but rarely carry much personal importance for the user. It's wonderful to have a fully-geatured word processor, powerful database, and security services. But these things have little immediate value to the individual user, even if you use them every day for work. Unless your self-actualization needs are met by them (for example, your life's work is designing and developing screamingly fast database servers, and you take great pride in what you do,) it's not as important to you as doing something entertaining. Like playing Solitare or Minesweeper, or finally fragging that really good player in Norway (and getting "whoa, nice shot" in return.)

This, in my opinion, is why entertainment-based computing devices will play a huge role in the future of computing. I'm good with SQL and I make a living off coding web sites, but I enjoy picking people off from 1 km with the Sniper Rifle in Tribes. I like coding, but it's what pays the bills. (Mind you, I've been spending a lot more time running around the city with my wife than gaming, but hey, that's more fun to me right now.)

After you've fulfilled the basics of survival and are living a relatively safe life, entertainment becomes quite valuable. It helps you forget your own shortcomings, while simultaneously providing the opportunity to learn how to overcome them.

information wants to be expensive...nothing is so valuable as the right information at the right time.

Where do you get that I assume that competitive societies are the standard? I use a comparison of two societies based upon economic prowess. China has vast land and human capital resources at their disposal. Their society leans toward cooperation (this is changing though, as witnessed by the rapid expansion of the Chinese economy) as opposed to competition. The society based in the United States is the other way around. The Gross Domestic Product of China is but a fraction of that of the United States. Economically, the competitive model that the United States is based upon is more advantageous than the model that China is base upon.

As well, a number of Chinese people I've talked to have complained of the U.S. trying to force values on their society that they don't believe in.

You're trying to turn a factual arguement into a moral one. I'm not trying to say that one society's morals are better than the other, I'm using each as a point of reference based upon economics.

My arguement has nothing to do with whether or not American values are beneficial or warranted around the globe. My arguement is grounded in the circumstances that our little world has to deal with on a daily basis. Many of those circumstances are based around human nature. For instance, it is human nature to want to improve one's station in life. Take a look at Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs. Physiological and Safety needs top the list. Accumulating wealth allows humans to fulfill these needs. Accumulating vast amounts of wealth puts humans in positions where they hardly need ever worry about whether or not they are going to eat the next day.

You say I do not support my arguement that China's economy and standard of living are unequal to that of the United States. It has nothing to do with American values. You seem to be confusing economic advantage with a morality play again. Speaking in strictly economic terms, the economy of the United States allows the U.S. to be able to produce more tools and derive more productivity per capita than China. I'm not trying to say that the U.S. is better off because more people in the U.S. have a car or a television than in China. I'm trying to say that the U.S. is better off than China because we have the capability to produce laser lithography machines to improve the speed of microprocessors. Our manufacturing sector is the most advanced in the world. Machines, such as earthmovers and other infrastructure building equipment are shipped from the U.S. to everywhere in the world because the U.S. has the ability to make these tools better than anyone else.

China simply does not have the economic muscle to build a freeway system similar to that of the United States. They will eventually do it, but it will take years. China's collective style of society (not government) puts them at a competitive disadvantage when compared economically to the United States.

Self-actualizing people are... involved in a cause outside their own skin. The are devoted, work at something, something very precious to them--some calling or vocation, in the old sense, the priestly sense. When you select out of a careful study, very fine and healthy people, strong people, creative people, saintly people, sagacious people... you get a different view of mankind. You ask how tall can people grow, what can a human being become?

Maslow also describes self-actualization as a person's need to be and do that which the person was born to do. It is his "calling". "A musician must make music, an artist must paint, and a poet must write."

Simply put, there is a "good" kind of selfishness too, and that is the selfishness practiced by healthy, self-actualized people. They are selfish, but make sure their selfishness doesn't step on other people. On the other side of the coin, those with martyrdom complexes -- you've probably met them, they're the "completely selfless people who look out for others before themselves" -- are ironically the most parasitic, burdensome and draining people you'll ever meet. They too are trying to become self-actaulized, but in a destructive way.

Writing open source software is a selfish act; it's just that it's one that benefits more people than just oneself.

Abraham Maslow, see this page for a description of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

Here's the "I feel lucky" link from Google for this hierarchy of needs thing:

Google Link