Slashdot Mirror
Xbox To Include Censorchip
yesthatguy writes: "According to an MSNBC Article, Microsoft 'plans to voluntarily insert a V-chip-like control in its new video game console.' More details are to be released at E3 in May. I wonder if this will catch on, or if it is just a Microsoft move to appease the government, or if, as the article suggests, it will reduce game censorship, and allow consumers to censor the games themselves."
The way I see it, if all televisions have V-Chips in them, then there is no longer an excuse for the FCC to regulate content on the airwaves. I look forward to live hard-core pr0n on broadcast tv, tagged with the appropriate v-chip setting so that people who do not want to see hard-core porno for free, can set their tv's to automatically filter it out.
Same thing for video games. The sooner all video game machines have v-chips, the sooner we can get the most extreme perverted stuff in games for everybody - no need to have the stores like Wal-Mart censor what they sell, anyone who doesn't want to see live nude girls on their x-box (or should that be their XXX-box) can set their v-chip to filter them out.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
While most people would think it's bad, it's in fact the right direction a game box manufacturer must go.
Let look at the market in Japan. People have always been saying Sega technically made better box than PS, but PS still sold much more than Sega's boxes.
The major problem is that Sega actually have some x-rate games. I personally think it's kinda cool, but those parents(especailly in Japan) who made the purchase decision will frown upon these and buy PS for their kids instead.
A video game developer told me PS and Sega has sole right to decide which game should be released and which shouldn't, unlike the PC game market. Sega is responsible for the appearance of x-rate games in their series.
Microsoft knows that X-Box market would be like PC game market, where they would have problem restricting x-rated games publishing. Making censorware is a right direction for them for the market domination.
Fair enough, nebby; I'm not a parent, either.
I just don't like to see methods like this used as a substitute for talking to the kids. If you've seen American Beauty, the military guy is a good example of this. He could have had a fairly normal family if he could take the time to talk to and understand his son. And his son could, if he could trust his father to listen to him, and not to beat him. But they're trapped instead, because neither one of them can make the first move towards understanding, trapped by fear of rejection or punishment.
This is what happens when you don't communicate with people enough, or don't make an effort to listen to them, or understand their point of view. If you do, then you can try to teach them morals, and convince them that something is right or wrong or even just a good idea. If you don't, then even if you can stop them from doing whatever behavior you don't like, you still aren't explaining to them why it's bad. You're fixing the symptom, but allowing the problem to spread--it's a very Western idea, but not necessarily a good one.
By the way, I like Half-Empty; I haven't been there in a while, though. It's still pretty chaotic, I take it?
Will the real Bruce Perens Please Stand Up
You can't very well have a person carding a kid everytime they want to use a R rated video game, can you?
Well its nice to know that you support descrimination. Last time I checked it wasnt the law to make it so that minors couldnt watch an r rated movie without an adult. Most theaters do it so they can sell another ticket (If you want to see this movie, you have to bring an adult with you...). I worked at a movie theatre for a good amount of time and I can tell you, that its bunk. There is no reason that a 16 year old boy/girl shouldnt be able to go see an R rated movie, because the MPAA has raters with a different dogma then these kids and their parents (IF they have parents). This is a war on the youth, and if you support that, well, fuck you. Teens and children are people too, if you put this on a system, your going to find your kids becoming criminals (because of the DCMA) much sooner then before. If your kids respect your wishes (becase respect is earned) then they might not want to play, and to destroy the want (say by not playing it infront of them) is better then to make them punished for having fun like daddy. It is censorship no matter how you look at it, and the difference from this and childproof lids is that medicine can kill a stupid child, a video game wont.
Fight censors!
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
How dare those bastards make it possible for parents to keep their children from playing violent video games! This is censorship at it's worst, the way they're making it so I don't have to wonder what games my kids have been playing while I was out getting groceries!!
Thank god it's the X-Box not the Playstation 2 that has this control, since we all know that Microsoft is going to fail horribly with the X-Box anyway, seeing as Microsoft sucks, and the X-Box doesn't run Linux!
--
"Don't trolls get tired?"
---
Come on folks, even IE has a Content Advisor (although I don't know how many folks actually use it), so is this such a big surprise?
It's a good marketing idea for Microsoft too, because like it or not, this will allow them to sell it to the same parents who are using their V-Chip enabled TVs and Content controlled DVD players. Of course we know that none of the software providers are actually using these features, so if it can get MS one more sale then they're going to offer it.
Before I start, let me just state that I'm in no way judging you as a (future) parent.
Just tell your kids why they shouldn't be doing 'bad' things and give them good reasons!
The problem with a technological rather than social solution is that it only applies to one specific type of device, won't work in the long run, and it DOESN'T teach respect or self-control to kids.
If you show a kid WHY they shouldn't be doing something, they'll be less likely to want to do it than if you just say "Don't do this... because I say so!"
Technological measures can always be circumvented if the kid really wants to do something anyway!
Would you know if you restricted your child's access to this material at home but they were gaining access through a friend who didn't have these limitatons?
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
I don't know how exactly a V-chip works, but if it's just some software that you can switch 'on' or 'off' (maybe even with some nontrivial keycombination or even a password that can be set) then i think sooner or later the kid will figure it out (maybe find the note with the password) if it really wants to. I think the only thing that'd really work would be some kind of key, that can be removed (and that should be treated like a key, and not left lying next to the Box).
While i agree with above statement, i feel it should be added, that it's probably a good idea to explain to the kid why you don't want him to watch some movies or play some games, especially not unsupervised. That would avoid the kid regarding this as just another stupid rule or even a challenge.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
The x-box needs a DVD content control chip anyway, so this seems like a logical extension.
What it all comes down to is making life easier for developers. By simply taking advantage of the chip, parents can block anything they do not want the kids to see. Great examples would be:
- A Soldier of Fortune port with both the no gore and normal versions.
- Giants, with the lockout turning blood green and adding underwear.
- Games could even incorporate the German style violence workaround: With the v-chip on, all life forms become robots.
This is a good thing. Really. Too bad Microsoft is doing it.
If it is worthwhile to bring children into the world, then it is worthwhile to make the effort to raise them properly. All the V-chips in the world can't substitute for it, and they're unnecessary if you're doing it.
And the brethren went away edified.
I for one intend to introduce extra salacious material onto my video games.
Anatomically correct Mario, anyone?
Goat sex free since 2001
I find your lack of lack of faith disturbing.
It is perfectly reasonable for you to want to filter content, where the qualities that you want to filter are a function of your values.
The probably that the V-Chip or a corporate-sponsored ratings board, will happen to coincide your values (or any other human being's) is vanishingly small.
When you let the corporations, or the government, or a mysterious focus group, select what is acceptable and what isn't, you are letting someone else shape your kid's mind. MPAA ratings are a great example of this. Unless you are a media expert, I bet you don't have any idea where "the line" is between PG-13 and R movies. I can tell you right now, that qualities such as sex and violence are only a minor parameters. And it's pretty sad what qualities (e.g. product placements) are left out of the function altogether, or are even selected in reverse to commond sense.
Filtering according to your own values may be good. Industry-standard filtering is slavery, brainwashing, and an asset in someone's marketing portfolio. If you love your kid, don't sell him.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Bachelor Party and the female version Bachelorette Party
Beat 'em and Eat 'em(due to the Atari's lo-res, I first thought the guy was holding a bazooka! Gameplay is like Kaboom, but instead of losing a bucket when you miss, the ladies fart)
Burning Desire and the female version Jungle Fever
Custer's Revenge
Knight on the Town
In a way though, they are correct. Let's say you have two kids, one who's 14 and one who's 9. It would probably be ok with you if the 14 yr. old played Half Life, but you wouldn't want the 9 year old to. What happens then when one is and the other one's in the same room? V-chips don't help this, so in that regard they're useless.
Sorry about the incoherency... it's late.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Say, V-Chip as Violence Hardware Accelerator. You just set up violence level and blood color and voila - hardware accelerated blood and gibs! Only supports Direct3D API, though.
Limiting the market, as is done with consoles, gives expensive high-quality games the opportunity to become known and grow in the market. Trust me, AAA developers don't mind licensing fees that separate the wheat from the chaff at all.
And though it's true I've been talking about things that help developers, one thing it seems that MS understands is that really good blockbuster games are what sell consoles, not a "name" in the industry, and not powerful but tweaky hardware. Which is at least one thing they're getting right.
Adults can stop their kids by teaching them, not by censoring them.
Tell a 10 year old kid not to play Quake because there is blood and guts and naked girls (ok, not in my Q3, but you get point..) and he'd probably still try to sneak in a game of Quake. I wouldn't necessarily blame curiosity on bad parenting.
What is a VChip if not censorship?
It depends on where you draw the line for censorship. I consider censorship to be the restriction of speech or expression of someone by and outside source of illegitimate authority. Parents are one of the only forms of authority who should be allowed to "censor" stuff from their kids. That's what this does.. though "censor" is a rather strong word for it. Is covering their kids' eyes during the scary parts of a movie "censorship?"
--
After all, *you're the parent* and so it's YOUR responsibility to keep your kids from having a meal of Codeine with a Drano chaser. You can't expect some furniture company's locking cabinet to do your parenting for you.
I can see how this could work. If Microsoft does this right, they can allow the programing community a bit bor freedom... Here's how I hope it comes out:
The V-Chip is controled though a physical key or code key. Yes, they are breakable (in more sence than one) but most "kids" won't be able to break them. If the kid is able to break the lock, he's old enough to know right from wrong, so I guess he should be able to react alot better to the more mature content.
Alright, Game developers will want the kids to play their games as much as the adults, (More moola, the allmighty buck!) So, much like "Mortal Kombat" for the SNES, there will be sweat instead of blood. Plus, you can turn on the "Gibbed" version of your game with the proper key!
This will encurage a couple of things:
A> Game companies will have to spend time making more games appealing to more audiances, and not just us "one shot, one kill" young adults that like blood, guts, a little additude, and a lot of inside mature humor. Instead they will have to produce some of the real gems that we learned to love as youngsters: Mario, Metroid, PacMan, DigDug, SpaceInvaders, Asteriods... Those old games that make us all smile...
and B> Developers can finaly make "Mature" games without having to worry about making the press scream "This is what you're 4 year old is playing!" as they seem to like screaming nowadays.
So, How could this be bad? Bad implementation, bad desgin, bad ideas on what's "mature" or not... Not ALL of this is in the X-Box's hand, but they sure could mess this one up.
Best of luck to the X box. I won't be buying one (I'm cheap, wouldn't pay $500 for my most rescent computer!) and I bet they're going to go all the way, just like Sony did the last time around.
On a side note, I'm going to buy a Game Boy Advanced the INSTANT it comes out. No compatition, really (I've heard about something else, but do you REALLY think they'll beat Nentendo??)
Pathway
I think this is a great idea. If games have ratings, and parents can control that, then I don't have to worry about my games being censored.
If i'm missing something, let me know.
What I remember is being told not to do somethings with no reason at all as to why I shouldn't, so I ended up doing them just to figure out what was wrong with it!
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
However, there's the other extreme, where parents that buy these items expect them to be the only means to control their children's viewing habits and take no other active participation in this; they are then the first to complain when their children have inappropriate items. V-Chips and filterware are not placebos for taking an active role in parenting, unlike how many wish they could be.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
I never said that they wouldn't ever even think about playing those games.
I just said that they would be less likely to want to, and if they knew that you were open about the issue, they would be more likely to want to talk to you about it rather than do it behind your back without your knowledge.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
You contradict yourself in the first paragraph.
Yes, if a person really wants to see/do something, they're going to find a way to do it. You can control things in your own house, but what about a neighbor or friend's house?
If you really did *explain* why a game is 'unacceptable' and they really understand it, then they are really unlikely to want to play it.
But don't forget that a child isn't an extention of their parents! You can't force your thought patterns and morals on another individual and expect them to follow exactly what you say. They are intelligent and searching for knowledge, good or bad. The only way to learn about something is to experience it, and just having a directive without reason behind it is just ignorance.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
If they want to have competitive hardware, they'll have to either charge twice as much as their competitors (and enjoy all the great mass-market success of 3DO and NeoGeo), or lose money on it. That's the way the console market works. Selling cutting edge hardware to teenagers is unprofitable.
The profit of the console market is in the software. To have any hope of breaking even, let alone making a profit, they need whopping licensing fees from the game developers.
---
I'm going to tell you how to parent, because I think I do a pretty good job. And also because I deplore the situation in which parents are so confused and bewildred that they feel they need Net Nannies and censorship on TV and yes, v-chips.
I wonder what kind of parents these congressmen are...
Ok, when a kid is 0-5 there is nothing in their environment but what you have created and placed there. You don't listen to NIN in their presence, you don't watch TV with them. You don't leave it on while you get the dishes done and they sit there, numb and brainwashed. You never turn it on, ideally, and its not part of their day.
You expose them to classical music. You roll on the floor with them, you fingerpaint, you color with them. You devote more time than you ever thought you could spare to them because between 0-5 they have and should have no one else in their world but Mommy, Daddy, and close family.
Which is to say that you don't Ever send them to Day Care. You make necessary sacrifices, which in this day and age means you must often choose between having a family and having a career if you are the Wife, or having a house if you are a Husband. But once you chose kids, the mother (or father) should stay at home all day and have the child(ren) by her side at all times.
You read to them constantly, sitting on the couch, close and warm, taking time for the child to ask questions. Often the child will prefer only one book to be read over and over again. That's okay, and never to be questioned. You can marvel at how the little brain is imprinting itself through repetition of the same (frikkin') story over and over again. You read to them every night.
After 5 years old, you guide them in their development, giving them signals that it is time to start growing up a little. This means - beyond potty training - exposing them to new experiences.
Ideally, at this point, they don't know what a TV even is. And they certainly have never seen gore, violence, or rage, except as played out within the safe circle of the family. Roughhousing is a wonderful exercise!
But also, their stories become richer in texture as elements of violence enter into the nightly readings. I prefer Finn McCollough (pronounced "Finn McCool"), of Irish Myths and Legends. It is amazing how gory and grim (pun intended) and frightening some of these stories are, but they serve a good purpose: mankind is not without its Dark Side, and it is better to acknowledge it and 'take it out for a walk' than to bury it. Start with them young, let them know that it is okay to entertain some negative thoughts. Frighten them, sure, but with a strong degree of comfort and security.
Then they come to rely on your judgement heavily so that only your influence matters in their lives. Others, including the TV and video game mfrs and rock stars, are powerless to influence the child, and their access is limited and always under controlled circumstances.
Then, as they grow beyond the age where you can control their access, you try to instill them with all the wisdom you can and teach them to discern between right and wrong, good and bad.
When they hit about twelve years old, they will begin to experiment with violent games and images. Here is where all those scary stories pay off (I don't recommend you read exclusively scary stories, but they will tell you which they like and which are boring, or too scary). You have taught them that their 'dark side' (the side that is scared, in reality) is okay, and they recognize the feelings. They also turn to you to validate them. At this point they know what is and what is not good for them. This is not to say that they won't disobey your wishes! There is a tacit acceptance that they will experiment, but you have done all you can at this point.
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
War on youth? I don't know if I agree with that, but when I was under 16 I had no qualms having an older buddy or my parents run in and get the tickets for me and my underage friends. Of course, there were times when we'd sneak in, but that's not the point.
.. we all know what makes it an R rated movie or a PG-13 movie. It doesn't really matter how ridiculous you think it is, if everything is rated relative to one another, parents can decide that an R movie is in fact something they don't want their 13 year old kid to see. 5 years ago an R rated movie was different than an R rated movie today, but the parent can still make the judgement call effectively.
The issue here isn't that a 16 year old shouldn't be able to go see an R movie. I personally agree that the age for movies is a bit ridiculous. The point is that giving parents control over what video games their kids can play in their house is a good thing, not a "war on youth."
I'm a kid too for christ's sake, I'm only 19 (watch my reputability drop...)
Having a parent turn off violent content from games their 13 year old wants to play is not discrimination even though the 13 year old "is a person too." Like it or not, you ain't got no rights at 13 years of age (in the U.S., at least.) It's for your own good, most of the time, anyway. 15-16 is a grey area, its different for each person how they mature, but the line does have to be drawn somewhere. Luckily in most cases the line can be shifted around by parents (ie, the movie case.)
And, BTW, it matters not what the opinions of the "raters" are of the MPAA.. (the use of that acronym spells troll to me, but I'll continue)
--
Not really. With medicine, if you lack attention for a few minutes, you risk finding your kid plain dead.
Well, the analogy was not for the consequences of the two things, but merely the notion of helping parents keep kids out of doing things they shouldn't be doing.
Not quite the same as finding him playing a violent video game and having an opportunity to teach him why you don't want him to do this, and discuss alternative video games
If you turn a video game off from letting a kid play, and he asks you why.. you can have your little talk then without him seeing the stuff and being extremely curious.
You're probably right about it not being real useful in parenting, but it really can't hurt (except if you're like that guy who doesn't want to pay for it.. Christ
--
Maybe not a vital feature, but a good one (IMHO). IANAP either, but I can definately agree that while yes, you should talk to your children and tell them what is right, wrong, acceptable and not, you may not want to leave the (perverbial) playboy channel unlocked. This doesn't have to deal with violent video games either, what about pornographic (or explicit, like Duke3d (maybe a stretch, but you get what I'm talking about)) games? Yes, there is a time and place to talk to your children about sex, girls and boys and why they are different, but that doesnt' mean I want my 5 year old son/daughter accidently turning on my xbox and starting up "Hot Redhead Nurse Strip Poker" which I left in the night before.
Don't forget, this has been done in a variety of ways before, to some degree anyway. The PS2 we have at work had a code to lock out DVDs if we wanted to, and games from as far back as
Whether this feature is used or not is going to be the thing, but not I hope, whether it was a good idea.
Flamebait, eh. I'll address it anyway. Let me tell you something about me. I know right from wrong. In fact, I'm an expert in religous morality, both past and present forms. When I was a child, morality consisted little more than "will I get spanked for this?" and "can I get away for this?". That's the reality of a 5 year old. They don't fully understand the implications of death, much less the implications of love and sex. I sure didn't. Which is why I want to expose my children to such things in a controlled enviroment, rather than let some video game writer do it for me. As they get older, and I am certain they understand right from wrong, and that games are not real, I will let them play games. But, it will be my choice. I'm not a hippocrite, I just don't want others raising my kids.
Burn Hollywood Burn
But, how is a parent going to know when their child is 'mature' enough to play a certain game.
Is there a magic age when a person realizes that the violence on the screen isn't real?
Some might realize this at an early age, and some might never realize this.
The parent still has to play an active role in the process, and I agree with the rest of your post.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
You mentioned that should sex not be satisfying that it would be hard to talk about. That's the major difference, sex is a very important part of a marrage, if you can't talk about something that's that important (i.e. explaining to each other what you like or don't like) then I think the relationship is going down anyway. I feel that I love her enough to be able to take the time and care about what she wants. Those are things that make the relationship work.
You are right that there is not a 100% perfect way to enter a relationship, but I choose to do it in a manner consistant with my belief structure. Also and I don't have a copy of this but I have read statistics that show engaged couples who have sex before they get married have a higher occurance of sexual dysfunction (especially on the part of the women) when they get married, as opposed to those who waited.
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
The Anti-Blog
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
The Anti-Blog
Someone says "Microsoft" and you guys jump all over it like crazed people! So, my DVD player and cable box are "censoring" content by having a parental lock feature? Because that's all this is... If the linux-based Indrema console had the exact same feature, you'd all be lauding it for responsibly giving parents the ability to control what their children are exposed to and giving developers an "out" that lets them create whatever content they desire. ("If you don't want our violent/sexy game played in your home, you can just lock it out!")
For a case like that, couldn't you just set your more mature games someplace more than a few feet off the ground, and you wouldn't have to worry about small children finding them and managing to become adept at slaughtering virtual enemies?
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Gotta love the knee jerk reaction to this comment that all the /. geeks throw out about the poster being an irresponsible parent. I'm just adding my comment into the mix because it seems to me that only one or two other people in the thread made the point that the VChip is a tool for parenting not a replacement. You cannot watch your kids 24/7, and even if you do tell them "no" it's always good to be able to keep them from the temptation of breaking the rules.
Granted, I'm not a parent, not even close, but I'm sick of seeing the idiocy of this issue.. the notion of "Microsoft being the nanny" because they're adding a feature to their video game system to allow parents to choose what can or cannot be played is absolutely ridiculous.
There's no difference between this and childproof lids on medicine and the fact that you need to be carded at movies or be with a parent. You can't very well have a person carding a kid everytime they want to use a R rated video game, can you? If the parent wants to let the kid play the R rated game, then they just turn the thing off.
It's not censorship. People on this site use the term way too loosely.
--
You have lots of good points, but I'd like to add a few comments...
... and you will never have to confiscate guns or drugs or condoms from them.
As the other reply said, I believe that a moderate amount of daycare is good for children. They learn to play with each other, to cooperate and settle arguments. Parents should have a close relationship with their children, but at the age of 3-6 I'd say it's also important to have other social contacts (even without the parent around) and daycare is a good way to offer them.
What the hell is wrong with condoms? In my opinion, safe sex is one of the most important things you should teach teenagers. Here in Finland, for instance, in the course of general education at the age of about 15-16 every boy and girl gets two condoms (one through mail along with a leaflet explaining about veneral diseases and one from the school pediatrician). It's not supposed to encourage students to use them and have sex (and I don't believe it does), instead, to show that safe sex is not a taboo and that condoms are an easy and safe way to protect from diseases if and when the time comes.
Of course, sexuality should also be discussed at home, not just at schools. At least my parents have done their part in educating and guiding me, I hope others have too.
How much education on sexuality (and I don't mean only sex) is given in schools/at home in the US? I've lived there only third grade, but from TV etc. (including posts like this) I get the feeling that in some parts safe sex is still a subject not to be discussed. Is this really so?
I doubt, therefore I may be.
Take your kids to day care. Not often, but not never. From my observations, kids are like little sponges. The kids I know that have been exposed to day care at young ages (in limited doses) are less shy (more confident) and appear better adjusted to meeting new people (whether it be toddlers or grownups) than those that socialize nearly exclusively with familiar faces. Could be wrong about this, but it's my observation that, in the very least, day care in moderation is certainly not harmful.
I'm not sure if the "classical music == smarter kids" notion is scientific or urban myth. Just to be sure, I'll let the kid listen to some of Radiohead's "OK Computer". I'll let you know if my kid becomes a drug addict.
Have to agree about the TV. Piece of shit it is. But I don't think that non-exposure is going to teach anything. Maybe let them watch a couple of hours a week. I prefer letting kids watch "older" movies. I defined old by the fact that I can't find any merchandise in the stores. They love the movies still, but you just don't have to [read: can't] buy the toys.
I agree that when they are old enough to rationalise (you decide), they need to be exposed to advertising so you can tell them what it's about and how ridiculous it is. Actually, now is the time to educate educate educate.
I could ramble on about my thoughts on parenting, but I just wanted to point out that we all have our ideas about how to be a good parent. I'd suggest that a lot of what we would consider good parenting would have to do with the way we raised. I had an argument with a neighbour who flogged his 2 month old puppy. His justification : "I had three dogs when I was a kid" (implying that this "experience" justifies his violence) !!!!????? Do you think his father taught him how to "teach" a dog? It's right to strive to be a good father. Just be open to suggestions and look for advice (books, friends, family, etc.).
And finally, teach your kids soccer :)
I see nothing wrong with curiosity. I do see something wrong with stifling it. I wouldn't be happy with the disobedience, but I'd rather have a chance to explain things, instead of causing resentment and not knowing it.
Covering your own eyes (or looking away) during a scary part of a movie is self-censorship. So is viewing slashdot moderation--self-censorship by a community. This isn't always a bad thing, but it should be noticed, and called what it is.
Do you remember being a kid? Did you always consider your parents to be the absolute authority on everything? I think that technological censorship tools either cause resentment in children, or teach them how to hack.
I know I spent a considerable amount of time getting around useless security measures in High School. If some of those hadn't existed in the first place, I never would have learned how to defeat them. (and believe me, they were pointless)
But in either case, I'm sure every good parent out there would rather keep their children's respect and trust by explaining things to them and trying to teach them morals than lose it by simply denying them what they want and not listening to them. That is my objection, and I think these tools often cause that; it is a form of neglect, and encourages poor communication.
Will the real Bruce Perens Please Stand Up
Some of their conclusions include:
Their data sources:
If you're interested, it's a good read. It contradicts a lot of popular sentiment, but provides justification for its conclusions.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
Well first of all, the X-box uses a standard DVD drive, which means it should be able to read your burned CDs, and DVDs (when DVD burners become cheaper and more widely available.)
As for the software, everything I've ready seems to indicate that there won't be any specific mechanisms to prevent users from playing their own discs in the machine.
The big thing that Microsoft has going for them is that the box runs DX8 and a windows kernel. This means that porting PC games is a no-brainer, and also means that game companies can simultaneously develop for the X-box and Windows with little impact to productivity. That is the real way Microsoft plans on winning; the same way they won the OS and browser wars.
-------
-- russ
"You want people to think logically? ACK! Turn in your UID, you traitor!"
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
I really hope this was a coincidence, and they didn't 'wait' for something like this to happen. This had to be a coincidence, it's not to cash-in on the 'bad' music and video games about to be blamed for corrupting youth... is it?
If the parent simply selects a rating level, how is this a parent/child interaction? I see parent/computer and child/computer, but no actual exchange of values. All it is is "you can't go there, because I say so". If this is parenting it's not good parenting IMHO. Just blocking stuff doesn't work; parents should actually tell their kids what is wrong and why they think so. Such technologies as the v-chip and censorware are just ways for parents to avoid (*gasp*) talking to their kids.
I just don't want others raising my kids.
And unless you edit the ESRB lists yourself (Do you think you'll have this kind of access to the ratings system on the xbox?), you are letting others decide what is appropriate/inappropriate for your children.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Better Microsoft play nanny and keep id Software from doing so.
--
This is a great idea. I'm 28 years old, about to get married and have children. I LOVE playing Half Life (only reason I actually own Windows), but when I have kids, I dont want my 5 year old starting up some video game whose objective is to blow people apart. Just like I don't want them to view R movies on HBO (which my Digital Cable box can prevent). It's my choice. End of story. It's not censor. It's not to "appease the government". If anything, it's to appease parents. It's a good thing.
Burn Hollywood Burn
TV's and VCR's already have this feature. DVD Players have different control measures. There are all kinds of little chips already built into your electronics to stop you from using what you own. Why should this be any different?
Feel free to protest this, but remember to also protest Macrovision, Region coding, Censorship, and parents who don't want to take responsibility for their children. I think these are all good things to protest, but I doubt you'll get very far.
Apparently people would rather have DVDs and games than basic human rights. Bread and Circuses wins over The Constitution any day...
Will the real Bruce Perens Please Stand Up
The increasing number of violent video games was bound to prompt some sort of response from hardware vendors. After all we have an increasing problem of youth violence in our society these days. Clearly something needs to be done to curb this disturbing trend. The fact that Microsoft is actively seeking remedy is definitely plausable as far as I'm concerned. Remember this will only affect those under the age of 18 who should not be allowed to play games unsupervised.
Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
What if parents don't want their kids exposed to religious programming? Granted, this is a non-issue as far as video games are concerned, but it's one of my pet peeves about V-chip technology. Sex and violence are not the only things that people may find objectionable. It seems rather arbitrary, if not discriminatory, that the only content that *can* be blocked happens to be the type of content frowned upon by right-wing Christians. It might appear that this is a coincidence, but consider that even the most restrictive anti-violence settings on the chip will often fail to block images of a certain man being crucified.
look, the fact of the matter is that all kids are little fuckups. for me, i know what games they own, but not what game they just borrowed from one of their little asshole friends. the real trouble is that anytime you try to "parent" the law calls it "child abuse".
and they wonder why we need technology to raise our children.
--
"Don't trolls get tired?"
I don't have a problem with such a chip, as long as its use is voluntary. If parents want to restrict what games their kids can play, then I don't have a problem with giving them the tools to do that. Not that I like the idea a whole lot, either. Still, I have to wonder why such a tool is needed if parents did their jobs. If you don't want your children playing certain games, listening to certain music, or watching certain movies, don't let them buy them or bring them into the house. It's that simple. And in case anyone says that parents can't possibly watch their kids 24/7, that may be true. My parents didn't watch me 24/7, but I knew the rules of the house, and I knew what would happen if I broke them. I personally think that being engaged in your kids' lives and communicating expectations of good behavior is a hell of a lot more effective than all the filtering programs and v-chips in the world. My parents didn't need a v-chip in their TV. They simply told me what I was and wasn't allowed to watch, and that was enough. Some might say that kids will try to break whatever rules get set out by parents, and that's also true, but kids have been doing that since the beginning of time. Besides, getting away with something your parents didn't allow once in a while added a little excitement to a kid's life, and it doesn't do that much harm. Who here isn't guilty of getting a brief look at a copy of Playboy when they were a teenager? And who didn't get a feeling of excitement from the notion that they were getting away with something (not to mention excitement for other reasons)? IMHO, kids don't get to be criminals because of what they may see from time to time; they become criminals because their parents aren't there to guide them to maturity. I don't care how good at blocking objectionable content technology gets, it isn't a replacement for good parenting, and it never will be. The thing that baffles me, however, is that we've known this fact for a long time, but very few people seem to take heed. Perhaps they think that they're being good parents by working the long hours to be able to afford a nice house in the suburbs and to send their kids to the best schools money can buy, never mind that their kids spend more time in front of the TV than with them.
That light you see at the end of the tunnel might be from an oncoming train.
Some people see the vchip idea as a guarantee that more graphic and nasty games will come out. This is because, they think, that the producers can rely on the vchip to keep impressionable youths away.
That's why all of those sophisticated nc17 movies are coming out, right? What people forget is that when you have an "nc17"-like level, merchants can say "I won't advertise games higher than x" or "I won't sell games higher than y." So it doesn't result in _more_ adult-themed entertainment, it results in adult entertainment that teases and uses euphemisms. It's the "everything but" solution that r-rated movies provide.
Actually, I like it - hacking the x-box so that it actually can do something useful.
Problem is, will anything useful run on it, or will it be obsolete by the time it is release, because even a bargain basement Compaq pizza box unit will have more power?
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
I don't know about every family, but in mine the kids (me) know how to control everything. Thus i have setup the password for the v-chip for the TV. So since i'll be the one who would control the on how to setup it on the x-box. Thus making the whole idea pointless as it is in TV case.
Everything we've heard so far about the X-box seems to indicate that it's going to be an ordinary console with everything that that entails in terms of tight control over software, severe manufacturer-imposed constraints on products, and ridiculously high licensing costs.
:-)
I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark on the basis of Microsoft's acknowledged ability to create markets for its products, and suggest that in practice the X-box will become the exact opposite of a conventional console. Instead, it will become an entirely open platform, in practice.
Why do I think that this may be so? For a number of reasons:-
First, the console market is already fairly highly subscribed if not totally saturated, so the X-box will have to be pretty special to make a large proportion of gamers reach into their pockets again. All the other popular consoles are closed platforms. A way of becoming "pretty special" is ready and waiting. [The still-to-be-launched Indrema is doing something similar, albeit with a certification hurdle imposed, but hopefully this will not be a substantive barrier.]
Second, it just so happens that virtually all the big players in the console arena either have or will be bringing out new mega-powerful systems within the same time frame, so high technology alone may not be enough, especially since Microsoft is a latecomer to this market. A novel angle may be required to make headway.
Third, Microsoft knows full well that the popularity of Windows stems very largely from the massive buzz that was created by several years worth of unimpeded free-for-all copying of both the O/S and its applications. The official face of Microsoft may protest about "piracy", but unofficially they must know that in reality unconstrained access is an extremely powerful popularizing mechanism, vastly cheaper yet more effective than advertising.
These three things all point in the same direction: Microsoft will either make the platform fully open, or it will create an easy and inexpensive method for all and sundry to write and install games on the X-box, or it will turn a very blind eye to the cracking systems which will appear 2 microseconds after the machine hits the streets. Nothing is gained by restricting what can run on a platform (all the talk of controlling for "quality" is unadulterated rubbish --- people like to decide for themselves, thank you very much), but everything is gained by having thousands of products run on a console rather than merely hundreds.
We'll see.
--
My ID is in the 200k's.
"No mom, the x-box *automatically* keeps kids from being able to play violent games!"
"Oh, okay honey..."
*snicker*
This sig is umop apisdn.
According to Merriam-Webster, censorship is defined as 1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively.
:)
How does Microsoft's inclusion of a function allowing someone to block things that they don't want to be viewed in their own private home, a function which is also entirely optional, count as censorship?
As much as I personally don't like it, those who have not reached their majority (age 18 in the US, differs elsewhere) have (basically) no legal rights. Thus, according to the law, their parents can make the decision about what they can see (or play, in this case) entirely legally. I mean, if you are old enough to take care of yourself, you can make decisions about things like this real simply, like by not enabling such "features" on your devices. If you aren't yet old enough to make such decisions, since you are considered a minor, then if the person who is legally responsible for you doesn't let you play Quake 5 when it comes out, too bad. Again, I don't agree with the almost complete lack of rights that minors get, and we could spend a long time talking about those rights in different places (especially schools, and their twisted hypocrisy), but that doesn't change the law; moreover, there are other places than here for that discussion. If you don't like the law, there are ways to change it. That doesn't mean that it's easy, or fun, but it is possible.
I don't recall anyone griping about the fact that lots of DVD players had the ability to disable viewing of discs that were rated at a certain level, but the function necessary to do so is built into lots of DVD players, both software and hardware based.
This article comes across as either a.) Microsoft bashing, OOOID (Or One Of It's Derivatives, another new phrase for your big list of acronyms) or b.) a little too much concern about "censorship." Or course, maybe I'm not paranoid enough, and the evil corporations and in league with the government and going for all they can take from us.
Since when is allowing parents to control what video games their children play censorship? Parents have a right to restrict what games their children play, and this chip gives them a good way of doing that. Parents should teach their children what games are acceptable and what are not, but no matter how much you teach a kid, curiosity is going to get the best of them eventually.
Many parents don't want their kids exposed to the violence and sexual content on video games, and this chip gives them a way to do that. I think that Slashdotters should recognize their right and desire to do that, even if you disagree that it's the right way to do it.
Just because the chip is there doesn't mean Microsoft or some NSA agent is going to slip into your house and randomly make it impossible for you to play certain games. Not every restriction on software is automatically an attempt by a big faceless entity to censor every aspect of people's lives. This is a legitament use of this technology.
The headline, especially, is just more Slashdot sensationalism.
I don't think that turning off the TV and reading a lot is bad, though you may be right, it is a somewhat deliberate turning away from um, TV. It's funny, but I feel so much that I am wasting my time with TV, I can't hardly watch it any more. I watch videos, but, c'mon, Friends???
As a parent, I feel the angst, sure! "Sugar is bad!" 'yeah, right...'
There is a sense of 'Edward Scissorhands', or, Pleasant Valley Sunday', if you will... that I tend to disdain.
Maybe you'll find out if your wife leaves
you because you're making her a 50ies-style housewife.
okay, next...
think of the V-chip as a right for you as a parent.
I understand that the 'v-chip' and 'Net Nanny' are institutionalized and (for some) hopefully socially accepted and practiced forms of 'parental rights' but I suggest that there are many rights that parents aren't availing themselves of.
Are you seriously agruing that not turning on the TV - or appearing too drunk, or doing whatever you shouldn't - is somehow isolationist and that is somehow bad? I'm not saying 'don't have friends'.
I'm saying: "Don't have 'Friends'."
I'm saying 'kill your TV'. It's okay if I play Parasite Eve, but kids, don't watch me, go in the other room and play with, um, blocks or something...
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.