Slashdot Mirror


Chinese Govt Limits Kids to 3hrs of Online Gaming

1MC writes "The Chinese govt is requiring game houses to modify MMOG's to restrict under 18 users to 3 hours "productive" gameplay per day. This "anti-addiction" software must be in place within 4 months, with games not compliant by July 15 liable to be shut down in China. Net9, Shanda and NetEase will be moving to comply with the government regulations. Users will have to register with their real names and Chinese identity card numbers to be allowed access to the games."

299 comments

  1. I disagree by hahafaha · · Score: 5, Funny

    from the thank-god-i'm-over-18 dept.

    I'd rather say, thank-god-i'm-not-in-china!

    1. Re:I disagree by rlp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      > I'd rather say, thank-god-i'm-not-in-china!

      Or Utah.

      --
      [Insert pithy quote here]
    2. Re:I disagree by angryoaf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Human rights or not, I think this is a good thing. I've seen so many kid's lives fall apart because of MMOs because their parents just don't "get it" here in the USA. On the other hand this will force MMO makers to stop making games that require multi-hour grinding sessions to keep people interested and active. They might have to actually come up with *gasps* engaging and entertaining content that can be completed within a reasonable time frame.... for China anyway. The only MMO company with decent North American penetration that tries to do this normally is NC Soft. God bless em and their ugly low budget games.

    3. Re:I disagree by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      The kid is in the parent's custody, and thus they need to decide whether or not the kids should play games. If not, it is not the government's place to make the call.

      Trust me, regulation of the state is bad, always.

    4. Re:I disagree by digitig · · Score: 1

      I'd rather say, thank-god-i'm-not-in-china! But I am in China! Admittedly I'm not staying, I'm over 18, and I'm spending far too much time on /. to get any gaming done...
      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    5. Re:I disagree by thaylin · · Score: 1

      The ncsoft comment shows this for the troll that it is. NCSoft games are the biggest grind fests, even more so then EQ1 and Vanguard. Also if the parents just dont get it they need to hurry up and get it, as it is their responsibility to relate to their kids and regulate them not society as a whole. I mean personal responsibility and all here please.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    6. Re:I disagree by Real_Reddox · · Score: 0
      A famous man once said:

      Government is a necessary evil
      --
      I spent five minutes stealing cool sigs and all I got was this.
    7. Re:I disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are, though.

    8. Re:I disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTB WoW gold futures...

    9. Re:I disagree by angryoaf · · Score: 1

      Thaylin you may have been correct at one time mostly because of Lineage - NC Soft is a Korean company and naturally followed the Korean MMO conventions. At the present time, however, you are misinformed. Auto Assault, Guild Wars, Dungeon runners (still in beta) Exteel (still in beta) Tabula Rasa (in pre-beta) and the highly anticipated Aion Tower of Eternity. All these games were/are being developed with the idea that players should be able to enjoy their gaming experience even if they don't have massive amounts of time to spend playing. In fact Dungeon Runners and Exteel (both of which I've played) are both "Log on have some fun and log off" high action games. The same can be said for Auto Assault; while there is some grinding in the game, grinding basically comes down to driving a car around the game world and blowing everything you see into dust and puddles of assorted bio-matter. Tabula Rasa which I haven't yet played follows the same type of system and the developers of Aion claim to have done away with the "grind" completely. Maybe you should check your facts before you calling people trolls.

    10. Re:I disagree by Mr+Mega+Brain · · Score: 1

      At least China doesnt advertise that they promote freedom. If your parents don't stop you from playing games then it must be ok!

  2. thank-god-i'm-over-18 dept? by tylersoze · · Score: 1, Funny

    Uhh how about the thank-god-i-don't-f**king-live-in-china-for-any-re ason dept?

  3. Terrible! Monstrous! Diabolical! by pushing-robot · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    When can we get that here?

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  4. I would imagine... by arkham6 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That kids getting caught faking identities to get around this would be dealt with harshly by the government.

    Parents (or kids?) going to jail because junior wanted to play WoW for more than 3 hours a day and faked ID?

    1. Re:I would imagine... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Maybe the kids can get off lightly if they report the parents themselves. I've heard this worked well in the past.

  5. China is repressive by CogDissident · · Score: 3, Interesting

    China is really repressive of their younger generation gaming online, primarilly because their dissident groups start up from these under 18 people being online. Stopping them from gaming as much will help disrupt bonds between the groups and cause slightly less anti-government behavior.

    Of course I think their system will collapse in a few years because of this anyway, but it is likely to stave off the inevitable for a little while at least.

    1. Re:China is repressive by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Working against the existence of dissident and anti-government groups usually leads to subversive and resistance groups in short order. Bite them in the ass indeed.

    2. Re:China is repressive by CogDissident · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The USA does this quite a bit, and we really don't have so many subversive groups, because the way that it is done makes their subversive groups look like fringe crazies.

      The thing china is doing wrong is that they are trying to stomp out subversive groups without addressing the underlying issues or at least swinging popular opinion against subversive groups. They need to cause their own terrorist attack (from XYZ subversive group in china) so that they can have public opinion behind the government again.

    3. Re:China is repressive by kestasjk · · Score: 2, Informative

      China isn't going to collapse.. For that to happen you need mass hate of the government, but at the moment China is in an economic boom. Zimbabwe has been under a dictatorship for years now, but only now that citizens are getting poorer are they actually starting to do something about it.

      The vast majority of people aren't going to risk their new improving lifestyles for the sake of extra hours gaming for the kids, or even free speech. I just hope a nut-job doesn't find his way into power.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    4. Re:China is repressive by CogDissident · · Score: 1

      You really should look up the industrial revolution, and how many, many governments suddenly found themselves forced with the decision to either change to a more open form of government, or face open revolt.

      Good working conditions actually give people inspiration to try to change their government, because now that they don't struggle to put food on the table every day they can spend time thinking about political issues.

    5. Re:China is repressive by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 1

      this law + pipe in some Rage Against the Machine = Revolution

      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    6. Re:China is repressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is pure speculation at the most. When those kids are not playing games, they have more time to waste on internet forums etc. and better chance of getting the information that the government dislike. When they are all addicted to games they are nothing more than a spoiled generation, and I doubt any of them will have the guts to put put against the government. You people need to stop criticizing China for things you made up.

    7. Re:China is repressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I surely hope that this system is going to "collapse" soon. (Although that would be wishful thinking.) This isn't good for the competitive gaming scene. Many of the better games are Chinese, and you simply can't become a gamer if you have never properly practiced before your 18th.

    8. Re:China is repressive by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Emphasis mine:

      You really should look up the industrial revolution, and how many, many governments suddenly found themselves forced with the decision to either change to a more open form of government, or face open revolt.

      Good working conditions actually give people inspiration to try to change their government
      Since when did the industrial revolution create good working conditions? It did the opposite -- made small farming not tenable, drove workers to the cities where they, if they were lucky enough to have jobs, faced awful working conditions. Mass unemployment provided the time and incentive for overthrow of government.

      If you're looking at philosophical movements among the wealthy, sure. Such activities require financial independence. But as for mass political movements, economic dissatisfaction is almost always required.
      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    9. Re:China is repressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm sorry but i hope to god it sticks and other countries adopt this rule. Video games are stunting lots of kids development physically.

      I know its extreme but I am fitness instructor, over the last decade, boys and girls alike have become naturally more and more lazier towards sport and fitness, I've been put in a position to get any reaction from kids these days to actually tone down the intensity of the exercises i teach because of this. Tell them to touch their tows, half of them will wont get past their knees. Tell them to do a lap of the school yard, they'll give you half the lap and dordle the rest.

      TV and Video Games are the reason why health and fitness of our young people is such a big problem.

      I know many "other" influences attribute to these things, diet etc. But parents are not aware how fragile their kids health really is these days, most parents see a "normal" looking kid, you take that kid outside and tell them to run around the yard, 9x out of 10 they will be so out of breath before they finish a 10 meter dash. I know not all kids are like this there are still plenty of athletic kids out there, but the AVG kid these days does not consider health as being an issue, these kids need to be steered into thinking that some level of athleticism is required.

      Although i don't believe GOVT shouldn be making such hasty calls in forcing children to not play video games as much, but lets look at it realistically, the AVG kids school day is about 6 hours + 3 hours for video games .. that 9 hours and I'm sure a couple hours of TV is in there, sheesh 10 odd hours of activities, plus they are supposed to do homework on school night .. I stick to this being a great idea, maybe letting them get away with weekends should be okay.

      Unplug the fricken xbox and tell the little brat to get down and give you 20 push ups. If they cant do that, grab the extra long xbox controller cable and show them how to use it as a jump rope.

  6. Oh no! by HellYeahAutomaton · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looks like I'll have to look to India for my gold farming.

    Can't they just restrict their manufacturing to 3 hours a day too?

    1. Re:Oh no! by FirienFirien · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why cut a cheap producer? A country that imports goods from China (or whichever other cheap producer you care to name) is cutting costs in the same way that a company will outsource work that it considers cheaper to be elsewhere. The options to the worker are to do a better job or work more cheaply. Demanding a high pay for a job that someone else will do more cheaply (and with a better quality ratio than the cost ratio, in most cases) doesn't make financial sense.

      Supply, demand. Attempting to get closer back onto topic - if you create a minor economy that pays people who are willing to invest their time in it in their own major economy, then you're always going to get gold farmers, whether live or bot. If a job pays, it doesn't matter whether it's a computer 'game' or a more conventional job; people are willing to pay for it. The only way to counter it is to remove value from grinding, which is uninteresting to a lot of gamers. Even games like Puzzle Pirates - whose rankings are utterly dependent on personal skill, with no +items, with little effect from having $$$$$$$$) - have seen botting and farmers.

      Even still, it's not likely to be tied to this topic - people who are using children for farming (perhaps a mild form of, but still being, child labor) will be simply able to get around the limit. The reasoning behind this legislation then looks very much tied to concern about health - especially with the occasional person in the news dying from binge gaming. That's reinforced by the messages themselves; it's also closely supported with China's other health programmes, which look from the outside to be carried out very well - for example the dental education program, paid for by the government, going out to the remote rural areas as well as the urbs and suburbs; with such a large population to watch over, blanket health programs and legislation (preventing or reducing the damage to health, in gaming or dental or whatever) are really very good.

      --
      Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
    2. Re:Oh no! by 3chuck3 · · Score: 1

      Yes, I thought the RMT/Gold Farmers where based out of China also. Will this mean people will stop slaying all my MOBs?

      Then a Big Yeah! for the Chinese government.

    3. Re:Oh no! by curecollector · · Score: 1

      Forget India - the local Home Depot is where it's at!

    4. Re:Oh no! by mkiwi · · Score: 1

      I was going to say:
      Guess the Chinese are going back to picking rice instead of picking gold.
      *covers head*

    5. Re:Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all employees of gold farms are under 18. Even if some are, the accounts would be registered by someone above 18 (the employer). And in some sense, if an under 18 is working as a gold farmer, then that's not unhealty gaming; it's WORK! LOL.

      The accounts would be on US/EU servers anyway. How the Chineses govt is going to extend their policies to US/EU servers is rather unimaginable.

  7. I wish US players had to do this... by beef+curtains · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...so that under-18 players could be restricted to certain servers, and the rest of us could play in peace, basking in the huge decrease in leetspeek, ninja looters, griefers & beggars.

    Seriously though, this whole "nanny state" the Chinese have going over there just cracks me up. I wonder if one can "bank" one's hours by not playing for a few days, in order to have enough time to join an end-game raid without worrying about one's big-brother software logging you off at an inopportune time.

    --
    Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
    1. Re:I wish US players had to do this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your name (beef curtains) proves that even those over 18 spout the crap we don't like to see in game. ;)

    2. Re:I wish US players had to do this... by beef+curtains · · Score: 1

      Touché.

      :P

      --
      Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
    3. Re:I wish US players had to do this... by MeanderingMind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While it is true that the majority of 13375p43kers, beggars and ninjas are youth, there are numerous adults who do such things as well. Hence why many "adult" guilds have the qualifier "mature".

      Having been intelligent and literate at 14, and having met people age 30 with the maturity of a toddler, I know there are exceptions on both sides. With the anonymity of the internet, it's best to judge someone by the content of their character and not by their supposed age.

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
  8. In other news... by Velorium · · Score: 1

    In other news kids are now swiping adults ID cards in China. Entire city blocks have now been closed off with hundreds of riot control police and...

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Chinese university students are required to take classes in the thought of Mao Tse Tung.

  9. If China really wants to help kids... by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about it starts by improving the country's dismal human rights record? I would be a lot less worried about my kid playing too much WoW than I would be about the possibility that he could be thrown in prison for the rest of his life because he made a speech at his school bad-mouthing the government.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:If China really wants to help kids... by goldspider · · Score: 2, Funny

      Newsflash: China's government isn't particularly concerned about human rights.

      Pictures at eleven.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    2. Re:If China really wants to help kids... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pictures at eleven.

      What are you talking about? All I see are happy pictures of happy people hanging around China's grand Tiananmen Square. It sounds like you've been listening to too many American conspiracies! Would you like to visit our special hotel for American conspirists?
    3. Re:If China really wants to help kids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if u want to help kids in china...go start offline gaming statup

    4. Re:If China really wants to help kids... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, he talks crazy. All is doubleplus good!

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:If China really wants to help kids... by Tom · · Score: 1

      How about not requiring everyone who wants to do something to have a perfect record on some other issue first?

      China is a huge country (five times the population of the USA) and is not inherently stable. Too much change too quickly might well lead it into civil war. You might not agree with its government, but it doesn't help to tell them they should improve human rights first on all other issues, because you know, a country that size has more issues than human rights, no matter how important you rate those.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    6. Re:If China really wants to help kids... by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Human rights cost money to protect. We in the USA know: ten trillion dollars of debt and counting by reason of the alterkockers (social security & medicare) and fourteenth-amendment-humanoids (other madated spending programs). East is East (liberty rejected as a colonial imposition) and (that's why the) West is bankrupt.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  10. What about the Olympics? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Will their be a timed meter for juvenile viewing of the local Chinese television coverage of that huge propoganda magnet when the time comes? Yes, yes, twiddling your thumbs on a game console for three hours isn't the same as watching large, barbarian Scandinavians cream your countrymen in the shotput... because at least the game console gives your thumbs some exercise.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:What about the Olympics? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      No, they just force them to watch the gymnastics and ping-pong events.

    2. Re:What about the Olympics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There!!!!

    3. Re:What about the Olympics? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I know. I know. I started out saying something about "their rules...", backspaced, and you know how it goes. Fscking submit vs. preview!

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  11. Chinese raid deterrent? by Xenious · · Score: 0

    So how will they raid with only 3 hours of game time? ;) On a serious note does this only apply to internet cafe's or also in home gaming?

    --
    -Xen
    1. Re:Chinese raid deterrent? by MaximvsG · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same thing. A lot of runs take over 3 hours. And just the time to get all your prep stuff for a raid can take some time. It would get frustrating being almost done in an instance when 1/4 of the group has too leave because they're hitting the 3 hour time limit.

    2. Re:Chinese raid deterrent? by notthe9 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the limitation with be server/account-based.

  12. Encourage? by catbertscousin · · Score: 1
    From TFA:

    The government yesterday issued a regulation, which takes effect on April 15, demanding online operators set up a "game fatigue system" that encourages players under 18 to play less than 3 hours a day.
    After the 5-hour limit, players will be subjected every 15 minutes to the warning: "You have entered unhealthy game time, please go offline immediately to rest. If you do not, your health will be damaged and your points will be cut to zero." I wouldn't call that encouraging, I would call that threatening. If I got that message and responded by going offline, it would be because I didn't want to lose the points I'd just gained, not because I was worried about my health.
    --
    No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    1. Re:Encourage? by backbyter · · Score: 1

      "If I got that message and responded by going offline, it would be because I didn't want to lose the points I'd just gained, not because I was worried about my health."

      You're thinking the damage to your health will be from the game. Since this applies to China I assume that the State very well might have something more direct to do with damaging your health because of your civil disobedience.

    2. Re:Encourage? by catbertscousin · · Score: 1

      Good point . . . that "your health will be damaged" line suddenly makes a lot more sense. I wonder if Chinese researchers will come out with some studies in the near future to prove prolonged gaming really does have adverse effects on the health - "Subjects who persisted in gaming past the official limits showed a marked increase in stress, paranoia, and damage to the bones in the fingers." Yup, those consoles are bad for you, kids!

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
  13. Read the article.. not the summary- no time limit by way2trivial · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTFA: "Under the system, known as the "anti-online game addiction system", the first 3 hours of play for each day is considered "healthy", during which players will be awarded full points in the virtual world. The next 2 hours will yield only half the normal points and there will be no points after 5 hours. "

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  14. What's wrong with people? by ilovegeorgebush · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Each time I read about China and their antics in the media, I increasingly dislike the country. I know we're not entirely free here in the western world, but at least we can make our own mistakes.

    Nanny states are bullshit, just come visit the UK in the not to distant future and you'll see what I mean (in fact, regardless of the nature of the previous link, we're already a nanny state).

    1. Re:What's wrong with people? by Nasarius · · Score: 1

      China has much bigger issues than being a "nanny state".

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
    2. Re:What's wrong with people? by Hrvat · · Score: 1

      Don't blame the country (and the countrymen/women), blame the totalitarian government.

      --
      TANSTAAFL
    3. Re:What's wrong with people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically any place with a speed limit is a nanny state.
      Nanny laws are there because there is a small minority of people that are stupid asses, cause trouble or are habitually rude.

      People speed and crash too much, Nanny gives us speed limits.
      People smoke and aren't polite about it, Nanny gives us smoking bans.
      People can't handle their drugs, Nanny makes them illegal.
      People that drive like idiots anyway do it drunk and kill people, Nanny makes drunk driving laws.
      People drive like assholes, Nanny makes aggressive driving laws.

      The only issue is that the 90% of the population that is well behaved are victimized by it, often on technicalities.

      The other 10% speed, do drugs, drive drunk, and smoke anyway. They just take their lumps when they get caught.

      The laws aren't stopping it.

      Good behavior can't be legislated. The government should focus on the people that commit real crimes, like murder and kidnapping. Classify people you kill from driving as murder.

      It would make more sense for the gov to say, "Hey, drive any way you want, if you kill someone you are going to jail for 40 years, whether you are drunk or sober. Fuck all you better be careful." Lots of people kill others in cars when they are perfectly sober. What about that? To me driving like a stupid fuck is just as bad as driving while intoxicated. In fact it's worse. Someone like that has an accident and everyone's like "Yea he killed 3 people but at least he wasn't drunk :P. It was just an accident.". Not being drunk makes it ok now. What a load... Never mind that he was doing 75 in a 30 with kids playing in the neighborhood.

      Instead they pull a guy, who almost never drinks, over that's had one beer at a checkpoint and it ends up costing him 12-20k, his reputation and his career. Meanwhile the real alcoholics (and sober people for that matter) that drive like nutjobs, and really kill people are going to do it anyway.

      What a joke... Nanny laws accomplish nothing.

      -AC

    4. Re:What's wrong with people? by porcupine8 · · Score: 1
      I think there's a big difference between laws that protect me from others' stupidity and those that protect them from their own stupidity. I'd only put the second under the heading "nanny state." If saying "40 years for killing someone" still isn't enough deterrent to keep them from being stupid and killing me, I'm all for smaller but more effective deterrents that prevent the behavior from escalating to the killing stage. I don't care if they get 40 years once I'm dead, and your average 16-year-old isn't going to actually believe that they're likely to kill someone by speeding. However, they *may* believe that they'll actually get a ticket for it.

      Btw, having one beer generally wouldn't put you over the legal limit anyhow, unless you're in an area where anyone under 21 has a legal limit of 0. Lots of people have a few drinks but assume they're fine to drive when others can see that they're clearly not, why should we trust them all? I have a feeling you have some kind of specific bitterness about this issue.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    5. Re:What's wrong with people? by narsiman · · Score: 1

      Then stop reading shit that the media spouts and visit the country for a change. You will see how radically different reality is.

    6. Re:What's wrong with people? by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because the right for under 18's to be able to level for more than 5 hours a day is really fundamental. Let's get up in arms

    7. Re:What's wrong with people? by grumpyman · · Score: 1

      The worst part is that the readers not only grow in dislike of the Chinese government, but more and more to the country and even the people themselves. You'd think Slashdotters are liberals or independent thinkers, heck no. These negative China-related articles are fumed by the editors - almost an anti-China propaganda website.

  15. FULL SUPPORT HERE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chinese kids who are playing games are Chinese kids that aren't making my cheap plastic crap.

  16. In other news... by The+Media+Mechanic · · Score: 1

    China requires Kids to undergo 3 hours of Communist Ideology Indoctrination Training.

    --
    I can throw as many stones as I wish; my house is made of transparent aluminum.
  17. wow by bemisit · · Score: 1

    I agree that China needs to work on its human rights issues first. In another sens eI can understand why they want to implement a system like this, although given that China likes to ban things (i do believe they banned at least some form of blogging fairly recently) and then un-ban them, I wonder how long this rash, harsh measure will last. Some people criticize America (and rightfully so in many instances) but atleast I don't have to live with asinine restrictions on how long I can play a video game.

    1. Re:wow by suzerain · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Right...in the USA, "human rights" are just something for (white or rich) Americans to enjoy. If you live in Cuba, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Peru, or Chile, or Guatemala, or any of the other countries where the USA has like assassinated democratically elected leaders, invaded to steal resources, helped to ignite civil wars - sometimes by arming both sides, or just generally swindled and fucked with in order to keep their governments bankrupt.

      Then, you can look at the prisons, which are filled with somewhere on the order or 80% non-white citizens in a country with roughly 80% white population. Over 2/3 of those in American prisons are there on nonviolent drug offenses (many incredibly minor for the punishment), and they are working as essential slaves in a privatized prison economy. Oh, and in many states, they will lose their right to vote - for the rest of their lives, despite the fact that drug laws have been continually lobbied for by groups like the trial lawyer's association and prison food suppliers, who make more money when people are incarcerated. (Money for white lawyers instead of freedom for minority Americans.)

      And then there are further instances that are sometimes difficult to quantify: Guantanamo, secret CIA prisons, evil despots in foreign governments who are on our payroll, oil companies raping poor countries by stealing 85% of their profits from oil, free speech only existing in "free speech zones", the PATRIOT Act, etc. and so on...

      Seriously, Americans (of which I am one) throwing darts at other countries because of "human rights" is a fucking joke. And it's a really twisted, disgusting joke, because these same Americans apparently seem to believe that their government is immune from being Really Fucking Evil because they can play video games more than 3 hours a day and say that Bush is a fucking asshole (which he indeed is).

      In the case of China, many of the "nanny state" policies are irritiating, and perhaps even "Morally wrong", and many are certainly motivated by a great deal of paranoia and self-preservation on the government's behalf. And, journalists have indeed been jailed, and all sorts of horrible things have happened in the name of the government. And all of these things are indeed disgusting.

      I'm not arguing China's government isn't tinged with evil. But if you get yuor head out of your ass and stop watching/reading American news, which is controlled by exactly 3 companies, 2 of which are defense contractors, you might find out our government is just as evil, only we hide it better, and we tend to fuck with people outside our country instead of inside.

      I think the real point is: governments are evil...plain and simple.

      Anyway, while you cry for the Chinese youth who can't play WoW for more than 3 hours a day, I'll come back to the "freedom" of the USA this weekend, where I can't even take hair conditioner on a fucking airplane unless it is less than 3 ounces or something, and in a ziplocked plastic bag. And, this plastic bag can only be a certain size, even if the contents are in tiny containers and don't exceed the limit, because we all know plastic bag size is what brings down airplanes.

      What is that you said about "nanny state" again?

      --
      gameDB
    2. Re:wow by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      That really surprised me, so I did a quick Google search. I found out rather quickly that about 61% of the US prison population was white as of 1997 http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/glance/tables/cpracetab.htm
      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    3. Re:wow by Knara · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Groups/persons with certain vested social and political interests apparently like to make it seem like there is an overwhelming white population in the US at the present time, when that isn't true. Still a majority, but not like in, for example, some northern European countries. You gotta admit that it's easier to make the case for being an under-represented minority when you can say that you're 20% of a country's total population. The amusing part is that in order to wield overwhelming social power, there's no real requirement historically for you to be a member of a majority population group.

    4. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a fucking moron. If only I could reach through your monitor and slap the shit out of your clueless ass.

  18. Productive Gameplay? by minotaurcomputing · · Score: 0

    Isn't that an oxymoron?
    -m

    1. Re:Productive Gameplay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite a few people in China use MMOs to raise money by farming and selling the game currency for real money. I suppose that could be termed productive.

  19. In the workers paradise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The government, not the parents, is responsible for controlling the children?

    I wonder who is responsible when little eight year old Le punches his classmate in the nose?

    Or 16 year old Hwang rapes a 13 year old neighbor girl?

    1. Re:In the workers paradise by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      The West. Duuuh.

  20. Repressive governments... by pubjames · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Before all you USAians start going on about how repressive the Chinese government is, many of us over here in Europe find it pretty strange that in the USA you can't drink until you're 21. That's much worse than only being able to play three hours of video games a day if you're under 18!

    1. Re:Repressive governments... by snarkh · · Score: 1

      Nice point. Excessive gaming should probably be discouraged by parents. I don't know why the government get involved, but then again, the American government seems very interested in the underage booze consumption.

    2. Re:Repressive governments... by rayvd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah yes, the obligatory anti-US spiel. On-topic to _any_ Slashdot discussion.

      So is this something "repressive" by the Chinese government? What would you say if your own government tried to impose something like this?

    3. Re:Repressive governments... by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      I'm going to make a sweeping generalization, but school was unpleasant enough with sober idiots. Expecting your average highschool senior to exercise moderation.... well. good luck with that. Plus the fact that schools want kids to graduate. Once they are in college them fact they pay money to go to school offers a tiny incentive.

      --
      You mad
    4. Re:Repressive governments... by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      Before all you USAians start going on about how repressive the Chinese government is, many of us over here in Europe find it pretty strange that in the USA you can't drink until you're 21. That's much worse than only being able to play three hours of video games a day if you're under 18!/blockquote. yeah, well it takes a few years of practice before you can aim a shotgun out your truck window well enough to hit those metric speed-limit signs while drunk. The fact that Europe is still full of those damned metric signs while here they're virtually extinct is proof enough.
    5. Re:Repressive governments... by pubjames · · Score: 1

      What would you say if your own government tried to impose something like this?

      Well, I can tell you one thing - if the governments here tried to raise the drinking age to 21 there would be far bigger protests than if they tried to impose this...

    6. Re:Repressive governments... by SocratesJedi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This claim seems to amount to "Because your government is wrong about certain topics, clearly every citizen of that government has no standing to be critical of any other government." No individual citizen has the capacity to control government policy so it seems to me a bit silly to claim that we all must have faulty reason when speaking on foreign governmental matters as a result of our government's lack of vision.

    7. Re:Repressive governments... by thaylin · · Score: 1

      Yes because gaming causes your brain function to deteriorate so that you can not make proper decisions for a number of hours afterwards right? The only issue with gaming is when parents do not instruct kids in the difference between right and wrong, or reality and imaginary worlds. Drugs, which alcohol is a member of, actually modifies your behavior, and dexterity making you dangerous to be around in certain events, which while drinking you have less ability to rationalize and prevent yourself from doing. I am not a nazi anti drinker, it does need to be regulated however.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    8. Re:Repressive governments... by beef+curtains · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree with you that, in today's society/culture, the chance that many high school kids will exercise moderation when it comes to consuming booze is pretty slim.

      However, do you think if American society didn't pound the "drinking is bad, drinking is naughty, drinking is dangerous, you should NEVER drink" message into kids' heads (as opposed to "alcohol is a beverage that people enjoy with meals & in social settings, but, like anything else, drinking too much is not a good idea"), would the average high school senior binge-drink as much as he currently would when he got his hands on some booze?

      And what if it was legal for said high school senior to go to the grocery store & buy some beer? Might that take away some of the "taboo" of drinking, and therefore the feeling that, upon "scoring" some beer. one needs to guzzle every drop in sight, because, "hey, who knows when we'll get this chance again?"

      Just thinking out loud ;)

      --
      Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
    9. Re:Repressive governments... by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      If only I had mod points, you'd be "+1, Amen"

      I've yet to be able to wrap my head around the "Here's a gun, go kill for your country... but no beer for you!" policy of americans.

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    10. Re:Repressive governments... by johncadengo · · Score: 1

      in the USA you can't drink until you're 21.

      Oh, you can drink. Just go to college.

      --
      My page.
    11. Re:Repressive governments... by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      maybe you should get a blockquote right first, then learn to use a shotgun ;-)

      --
      Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
    12. Re:Repressive governments... by pubjames · · Score: 1

      Absolutely - in France, for instance, some schools serve wine with school lunch to kids as young as 14. This helps foster a mature attitude to alchol, and kids quickly get the idea that being drunk is just immature.

    13. Re:Repressive governments... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the mandatory anti-US post.

    14. Re:Repressive governments... by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      Oh god the mixed messages. Beer commercials every 5 minutes.

      --
      You mad
    15. Re:Repressive governments... by Stooshie · · Score: 1

      Ah but here in Britain, 18 is the school leaving age. and 18 is the legal drinking age.

      Also, are you telling me that no-one under 21 drinks in the USA?

      --
      America, Home of the Brave. ... .and the Squaw.
    16. Re:Repressive governments... by jswigart · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe something to do with months to years of responsible training of proper use of combat equipment, in a job that requires a reasonable amount of responsibility and respect for others. Versus, a high school or college kid that has neither responsibility, nor respect for others getting drunk at a party and killing themselves or an innocent on the way home, which happens far more often than an irresponsible military member doing the same. It's not hard to remain ignorant on the differences between the two when you don't bother thinking about it for 5 seconds. There's much more at play than simply the age of the participants.

    17. Re:Repressive governments... by Knara · · Score: 1

      Ah, and the the obligatory "that factually correct post that makes me uncomfortable because it points out how the US government suffers from some serious brain damage and so I'll whine and imply that slashdotters are anti-American" reply.

    18. Re:Repressive governments... by snarkh · · Score: 1


      He is making a good point. People get very excited when the opression is of unfamiliar kind but generally do not notice it right in front of them.

    19. Re:Repressive governments... by brkello · · Score: 1

      How is that related? You say they think it is strange, but do they find it repressive? Besides, I don't know a single person who has actually waited until they were 21 to drink.

      In any case, every culture is going to find something they don't like about a different culture. Even Slashdot has its own culture...and it is very anti-government control. So yes, to a typical Slashdot this is repressive. Our country is moving too much in that direction already. But hey, maybe Jack Thompson can move over there. Sounds like the Chinese government is more willing to "protect the children" from the evils of video games.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    20. Re:Repressive governments... by NocturnalCritter · · Score: 1

      In the early 1900s, there was a huge religious push to ban drinking. Ever heard of Prohibition? It failed so dismally, that for the first and only time, the US repealed an amendment to its Constitution. But it came back, not quite so religious this time, sort of as a "save the children" idea. Technically, each state has its own drinking age, but since the Federal government threatened to cut off highway funding to states that didn't raise that age to 21, it's really a national thing.

      I don't drink; never have. But I'm not stupid enough to think that people actually wait until they're 21. Also, making an arbitrary call on when someone's allowed to drink can have some pretty nasty side effects, as many, many 21st birthdays consist of getting as drunk as possible. I say, let people decide when they're able to handle it, if they want. There'd be less pressure, at least, for kids to get drunk to prove themselves to their friends.

      --
      The e-mail of the species is more deadly than the mail.
    21. Re:Repressive governments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one said the post wasn't factually incorrect. The point was that it didn't have anything to do with the original topic(China) and that it was anti-US. So STFU.

    22. Re:Repressive governments... by evil_Tak · · Score: 1

      Other countries seem to be doing all right in this respect. Judging by our test scores, maybe more of our students could use to be intoxicated during class...

    23. Re:Repressive governments... by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      But the argument isn't (usually) "Oh, it's unsafe"... notwithstanding that a drunk 22 year old will likely have the same result as a drunk 20 year old. The argument advanced is usually maturity level. "Young kids aren't responsible enough to drink".

      Frankly, you're taking an 18 year old, signing him up, giving him the 6 or 8 weeks of basic training, and then sending him to Iraq with a loaded M16. While M16s are much more dangerous than a bottle of beer, I'd personally be much more concerned with the 18 year old pointing an automatic weapon at me, than the 21 year old pointing a beer bottle at me.

      If you feel someone is responsible enough to kill in the name of his country, then you have to feel that he's responsible enough to have a beer. Or, if you feel kids under 21 can't handle a bit of alcohol, then why do you feel it's OK to give them a gun? Or, if alcohol is so dangerous, why is it that once you hit 21 you can be stone drunk every day for the rest of your life, and no-one will really care? If it's dangerous, shouldn't it be regulated?

      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
    24. Re:Repressive governments... by jswigart · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's just me, but I'd trust a basically trained 18 year old military member to have much more respect and personal responsibility than I would just about any college student with alcohol. Many colleges these days are all about partying and drinking. There is no training for responsible drinking. Holding a gun doesn't hose your reasoning and judgment so that you get in fights, sleep around, or worst case drive and end up killing someone else. I've never heard anyone single out maturity level as the problem behind drinking laws, but even if they did, age is a meaningless indication of maturity level. How someone is raised has a much greater effect. I've met pre-teens with more sense, respect, and maturity than adults. Unfortunately the law can't really be that flexible in making exceptions. I would cringe at the thought how how much worse colleges might be were they all allowed to legally drink at 18.

    25. Re:Repressive governments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I can tell you one thing - if the governments here tried to raise the drinking age to 21 there would be far bigger protests than if they tried to impose this...


      Already talking about it - in a Lancet report.
      Strangely, Drinks companies are against that.

    26. Re:Repressive governments... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      ROTFLMAO. Anyone who imagines the US is any more repressive than the EU nations is *seriously* brain damaged himself. The OP was indeed doing nothing but bashing without a point. Your kneejerk ignorance merely confirms my point.

    27. Re:Repressive governments... by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

      When there are rules against drinking and you show up to a public school drunk or hungover its going to get back to your parents very quickly once the teacher notices. Then the school rules pop up.
      If the drinking age was 18 or there was no drinking age you would have kids who come to school drunk. Then despite being very pissed with their little angel, parents would argue that the school cannot kick them out because it legal for them to drink. It will happen, and it would stop after a few years but it would be annoying before a legal precedent was set.

      --
      You mad
    28. Re:Repressive governments... by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Not anti-US spiel, but anti-hypocrite spiel

    29. Re:Repressive governments... by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

      Nothing like getting your kid tanked and expecting them to do well. I'm not saying I wouldn't let my kids have some, but nothing as excessive as what you're promoting. Introducing them to a bit of wine with a nice meal: good. Handing your kid a six pack: irresponsible. Most people in the US aren't freaks about alcohol, they just don't want their kids to endanger themselves or others.

    30. Re:Repressive governments... by Knara · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, the OP's point is true. We can't say that the US encourages personal freedoms for its citizens when we arbitrarily restrict behavior based on age *after* one becomes a legal adult. More clearly, if I'm a legal adult, why should I need to wait until an arbitrarily different age (and it *is* arbitrary) to take part in a particular legal activity? Especially since other similarly advanced western societies have more permissive policies and (to reference the current example) don't have an entire society full of raging binge drinkers killing themselves on a daily basis in huge numbers via alchohol poisoning and/or running each other over via DWI.

      The problem lay in your kneejerk reaction (and those of like mind, who label themselves "patriots" but are closer to being "nationalists") to anything that even implies that America might not be the world's most free society in the in every respect, and may not have the most well-reasoned implementations of legal statutes. Criticizing the US isn't wrong, and pointing out flaws in the status quo is important. People of the "love it or leave it" nationalist mindset are simply handing over their critical thinking skills in favor of feel-good propaganda.

    31. Re:Repressive governments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an American (not USAian, what the fuck is that?), who spent much of my childhood in various European countries, I can assure you that being able to get drunk legally 3 years earlier isn't much of a consolation prize for having to live in Europe versus the United States. Having spent so much time in Europe and North America, I can assure you that the United States is a much more pleasant and freer place to be.. Just FYI.

  21. Old news by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 1

    The Chinese government started out by limiting World of Warcraft to 3 hours a day, but that was like a year ago...

    And, when that happened, there were tons of stories about how people just got more than one account, since time played was dependent on the account that you're logged into. Perhaps they'll change the way these other MMOs deal with it, but there was a simple (and very lucrative for Blizzard) workaround in WoW.

    1. Re:Old news by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      Heh heh, I bet gold farming companies just set a kitchen timer for 3 hours, and when it beeps, the workers just move one chair to the right.

    2. Re:Old news by rehtonAesoohC · · Score: 1

      Ahahaha, oh man that's funny... If I hadn't already posted in this discussion, I would totally mod that funny.

  22. This is not to restrict kids online playtime by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Users will have to register with their real names and Chinese identity card numbers to be allowed access to the games.

    THAT is the real reason. Register for this...soon register for ALL internet use.
    "We want to know who you are and where you go."

    1. Re:This is not to restrict kids online playtime by mstahl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm actually quite surprised I had to read this far down in the comments to find someone else who caught that.

      Hearing China freak out about video game and internet addiction so much lately has raised some weird red flags with me. The Chinese government has a lot of reasons to keep people offline, and online gaming is one of those things the Great Firewall of China (the existence of which the government denies) they can't control as tightly. This is another subtle way to keep their citizenry in line.

  23. it's so sad that China that gets it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is so sad that it has to be a country like China that finally gets it right.

    MMO-s are addictive, they are designed to be addictive, not as a controlled substance but as a physiological trick of continuous reinforcement. Very soon people do not have fun in these game, rather they can't actually quit, they need to play to feel good again and regular life seems devoid of this feel good ingredient.

    Alas I know too well what it is like to be addicted to an MMO. And I consider myself lucky to still have a job (thank god for my wife).

    Moreover asian countries are at even more risk than US. There is a cultural affinity to the kinds of achievments that MMOs offer: "grind=advancement" and people get sucked in a lot more. Regulating gaming seems outrageous, until you realize that we're getting into a territory where we are not talking about games anymore...

    1. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      You = Fission mailed.

    2. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      I disagree. China did not "get it right" with these new restrictions, at all! (Let's pretend, for a moment, that their motives behind limiting gameplay have NOTHING to do controlling youth who want a "secret place" to communicate freely and disagree with government.)

      Even IF their motives were purely "in the best interests of the kids" (yeah, right!), since when is it government's job to interfere in this way? MMOs *are* addictive. No argument from me there! That's one big reason I'm divorced. My ex-wife got WAY too hooked on them and stopped communicating with me, except to drone on about some virtual achievements in the game (until she had to run and take a phone call from someone in her "clan", bugging her to get back online and help them form a raiding party or what-not). It's crazy....

      But STILL, I'd be pissed off if our govt. placed some type of legal restriction on the use of this software! When you're a teenager, you have loads of "free time". If you're at least playing a MMO type game vs. some one-on-one console game, you're socially interacting online. And these Internet cafes get youth out of the house, at least. It's the job of *parents* to decide when their kid has done enough gaming for one day, not the government!

      And *adults* getting addicted to MMO games? Well, that's your own problem to deal with. MANY things in life can be addicting.

    3. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by RogueyWon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ok, I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but...

      There was a time - back when I was actively playing a MMORPG (Final Fantasy XI) that I would have agreed with the idea that MMORPGs are addictive. However, my experiences over the last year or so have made me far less certain.

      I started playing FFXI in November 03, importing a copy from the US when it launched there. For the first couple of months, it was just a curiousity... something I logged into once in a while and ran around a bit. Then somebody else I knew in real life started playing. And then another. The amount of time I was putting into the game increased considerably, to the point where it was taking up well over 50% of my non-work time (I have what's essentially a 9-5 office-based job). I was going out less, particularly at the weekends, playing other games less and watching fewer movies (never complain about MMORPG monthly fees - you wouldn't believe how much money they save you). About the only other past-time that didn't suffer was reading.

      I got heavily into the game. I did the whole end-game thing, with all the grief and drama that went with it. I slogged through the Chains of Promathia expansion, which was exhausting, frustrating, and infuriating, but also responsible for some of the biggest adrenelin rushes I've ever had from gaming.

      At this point, if the addiction analogy were really true, the next stage of the story should write itself; losing contact with real life friends and family, locking myself away in a darkened room, losing my job, dying alone in poverty etc. Except... it didn't. Some time last summer, I noticed that I just didn't quite care about the game as much as I had in the past. Logging in felt more like a chore, the game itself rarely did much for me and I was losing interest in the community. Over the next few months, my play time dwindled rapidly. By Christmas, I was only logging in for a couple of hours a week for scheduled Limbus runs. By February, even that had stopped.

      There was no dramatic intervention. No moment when I realised I needed to go cold-turkey. In fact, I never did go cold turkey. I've still got the game installed and still pay $15 a month for my account. I just don't log into it, because I can't be bothered. It's not that I've moved onto another MMORPG. I have a WoW account, which I do log into occasionally, but I just don't find that game fun enough to grip me for long periods. Rather, I've more or less gone back to using my free time to do the things I did before FFXI came along. I'm not alone in this... the real life friends who got into FFXI shortly after I did followed a similar trajectory.

      Now, compare that to how a genuine addiction works. I've known lots of smokers. I've also known a guy who started smoking cannabis at 15 and who was dead of a heroin overdose at 23. I've never known a smoker just give up the habit because they found cigarettes just didn't do much for them any more. From what I've seen (and I've never smoked), giving up smoking is painful (emotionally and perhaps even physically) and requires a good chunk of will-power. When drug users find that their current drug of choice doesn't do much for them any more, the response seems to be to move onto something harder.

      MMORPGs have the effect on people they do for a number of reasons - interesting game worlds, clear goals of the kind that people lack in their real lives (this one is important), the ability to act out fantasies, a sense of worth from standing in a virtual community and so on. However, I can no longer believe that genuine addiction is one of the factors at work in most cases.

    4. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by thaylin · · Score: 1

      That is just an excuse for people with little to no self control. People play these games because they want to. If the situation occurs that you mentioned that that individual has deeper underling issues then this game has cause. I have been an avid MMO player for about 13 years. I am not addicted to a game. I hop around and play these games, yet I also have an active social life. Dont blame the games for your lack of self control.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    5. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, games are addicting, as well as pr0n, drinking, drugs, TV, and fast food.

      What determines which things are ok for the government to regulate? All of these things are arguably harmful to humans on an individual and social level, just in different ways.

      It all comes down to politics, at least in the US. Marijuana was outlawed because some psycho parent-killing teen was using it, so a politician made it super public and outlawed it to give himself a good image. Cocaine was initially seen as a wonder-drug (Coca-cola, anyone?) but was outlawed because politicians argued the "lesser races" couldn't handle it and would go on raping sprees, so capitalized on racism and fear to make themselves look like heroes.

      Any of these other things could be subject to regulation if a politician finds a way to gain from it...

    6. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

      It is so sad that it has to be a country like China that finally gets it right.

      Finally, a response that I can agree with. Yes, this law may seem silly to some, but it makes perfect sense. Two things:

      1. Every country limits the activities of minors. The assumption is that minors are at risk, compared to adults, and need extra protection. The USA doesn't let minors buy alcohol - til they are 21, even. Sex is also limited (to 16/18/whatever, depending on the location). You can argue with the specifics, but some form of protection for children is reasonable. MMO addiction is certainly dangerous, so it isn't unreasonable to protect against it. Also, the restrictions are 'smooth' - first you gain less points, then no points, then warning messages (yes, I read TFA). Some thought went into it.

      2. Actually, it isn't surprising that a country like China would be the first to enact such a law. The West - USA, mainly - are too influenced by big corporations. The big corporations want the population addicted to their products, be they movies, food, or MMORPGs.

    7. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by Explodicle · · Score: 1

      Doesn't WoW have anti-addictive features? I remember reading somewhere that you would get less experience after playing for a long time, and would have to wait in town or log off in order to "rest".

    8. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by thaylin · · Score: 1

      No, you get bonus XP if you log out to rest for a period of time, as long as you were not max level. At no point would a person with normal xp gain drop if you played for x number of hours.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    9. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And *adults* getting addicted to MMO games? Well, that's your own problem to deal with. While I don't agree with governmental restrictions on pretty much anything, I do have to say your comment seems naive to me. Yes adults get addicted to these games and I suppose it's someone's own problem to deal with, but how exactly do families do that?

      There are no guidelines as yet for families who have lost a member to MMORGs for dealing with the problem -- what do we do? Go to Alanon? Unfortunately I think this is a knee-jerk reaction by the Chinese government which isn't likely to solve anything.
    10. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by thaylin · · Score: 1

      This sort of protection should be done by the parents, but then again most parents now a days want to blame everyone else but themselves for the problems with their kids. US already has laws to prevent kids from buying games with mature ratings, as in with beer.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    11. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by MeanderingMind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder if there are technical terms separate short and long term addictions.

      People call MMORPGs an addiction because up until the point where you burn out they exhibit all the symptoms of it. Your social life does suffer, other games are left unplayed in favor of the MMO, chores are put off (well, this happens anyway) etc. The crucial difference, insightfully noted by you, is that instead of finding something harder or being perpetually enslaved there is a sudden burn out and the "addiction" ends.

      I'd still qualify MMOs as addictive, but they aren't perpetual or ever increasing. I'd almost say that's their saving grace.

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    12. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by KenshoDude · · Score: 1

      Only an AC could make such a ridiculous post. You describe MMO's as if they are casinos. There is a big difference here... MMO's aren't designed to profit from the amount of time you play during the month. They get their $x per month whether you play 2 hours a month or 48.

      My comments are coming from someone who at one time played 3 to 4 accounts simultaneously in the orignal EQ. I had over 200 days played on my "main" alone. Was I addicted? I would say yes. But how is that any different from people who spent 200 days over the same time period watching television or reading books? The true sign of an addiction, in my "practical" opinion, is when the behavior becomes harmful to the individual, but they continue the harmful behavior anyway.

      The Buddha had a simple explanation of what it means to be wise: its learning to avoid the behaviors we WANT to perform when we know that they are ultimately bad for us, and about embracing the behaviors we would prefer NOT to perform when we know that they are ultimately good for us. But how do we learn whether a given behavior is good for us or not? You learn by performing that behavior and paying attention to the results. Given that, I know a group of recovering alcoholics that have a saying: "If you believe that a drink is the answer you are looking for, let me buy you your next round." The trick about human beings is that we typically must hit a "rock bottom", reaching a critical mass of suffering before we are finally willing to make a personal change.

      The point here is that the problem is not in the objects of the behavior, the problem is with the person performing the beahvior. Removing the casino doesn't heal the gambler's addiction. Prohibition does not cure the alchoholic. Nor does limiting game time alleviate the gamer's obsession.

      These regulations from China are not about the psychological well being of the children. They are about mind and behavior control. The less time the populace is exposed to the outside world, the more time the government can indoctrinate them to fall in line with their inner world.

    13. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by Knara · · Score: 1

      I just don't know if that's true, because what you describe as "short term addiction" could apply to a great many things. Getting a new hobby could fall under your definition, for example. Plus, I think the difference here may lay in the details. Namely, that his real life friends also started playing the game. This sort of drifts then into "is playing online games social interaction?" conversation. I tend to think that it is, but there are people who disagree. I just don't think that "it was my main hobby for a few months and I spent a lot of time playing it, so didn't watch movies much at all" qualifies as an addiction.

    14. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by Hatta · · Score: 1

      The assumption is that minors are at risk, compared to adults, and need extra protection.

      That's why they have parents.

      The USA doesn't let minors buy alcohol - til they are 21, even. Sex is also limited (to 16/18/whatever, depending on the location).

      So because we're unjust, it's ok for others to be unjust?

      You can argue with the specifics, but some form of protection for children is reasonable.

      Absolutely, parental supervision is entirely reasonable.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    15. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by Zero_DgZ · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't point all the fingers at MMO's quite so hastily. There's more to consider than just crying shrill "MMO games are evil, regulate, infringe, ban!" and then calling it a day.

      (We tried that with 'politically incorrect' looking guns during the Clinton administration, remember? How much did that accomplish?)

      The root of the cause is the fact that MMO's are generally pay-to-play games, and the authors want you to keep playing so you keep paying. So they design things so it takes ages to get anywhere, tons of time to level, plenty of need for grinding, and always dangle the carrot of all the cool shiny armor and mounts and kickass swords and dragonslaying and shit way out there towards the tail end of the level cap, so you have to invest a shitload of time (and therefore money) to get to all the "good stuff."

      This problem isn't confined strictly to MMO games. Diablo 2, anyone? It's also not relegated strictly to pay-to-play MMO's, either, as most of the knockoffs strive to emulate the big boys; the ones you have to pay for - EverQuest, World of Warcraft, et. all.

      Now that "online delivery" is becoming a viable platform for gaming in all sorts of places - On PC, the original Xbox, and all three of the current gen consoles - the concept of hooking players as recurring revenue sources suddenly makes a lot of sense. So we're seeing the model applied in new ways: Episodic gaming, where you get little half-baked nuggets of games for slightly less than you'd pay retail, but to get the whole experience you have to keep buying the next one. Subscription gaming a la Gametap, Xbox Live, and similar where you have to pay or your game library goes poof and disappears. Then users are pushed into playing almost compulsively to get their "money's worth" out of this service.

    16. Re:it's so sad that China that gets it right by mistermiyagi · · Score: 1

      "Now, compare that to how a genuine addiction works. I've known lots of smokers. I've also known a guy who started smoking cannabis at 15 and who was dead of a heroin overdose at 23. I've never known a smoker just give up the habit because they found cigarettes just didn't do much for them any more. From what I've seen (and I've never smoked), giving up smoking is painful (emotionally and perhaps even physically) and requires a good chunk of will-power. When drug users find that their current drug of choice doesn't do much for them any more, the response seems to be to move onto something harder."

      I did exactly what you just said I quit smoking tobacco(from a pack a day) because It really did stop doing anything for me. It is a common myth that you have to hit a bottom before you can get better. Some people, me included , are proof that if you really decide to stop ,you can. If you watch intervention (I do mostly because I have friends who fight addiction) it tends to be the people that do get better don't put up a real fight when confronted. They know they have a problem and really do WANT to get better. The sad truth is that depressed or lonely people will have a harder time getting away from one of the few things that fulfills them emotionally. I don't want to downplay addiction.. it is very serious and I can understand how hard it can be to quit but you do have to understand that unless you really want to stop for yourself you probably won't.

  24. Homework by jlebrech · · Score: 0
    So kids in China will do their homework, that's good for increasing the IQ of an already highly developed country technology-wise.

    Wait about 10 years and see how different the IQs of china and the USA match up.

    1. Re:Homework by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you've never done any work in China. 10 years! Thanks for giving me a good laugh. (I compare with Europe though, the US "IQ" is totally down the pan and lost to China many years ago). BTW, doing your homework has nothing to do with an artificial "IQ" test. (Unless you're studying IQ tests).

  25. help me count here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "restrict under 18 users to 3 hours"

    total user amount to restrict is a max of 18, and these, less than 18 will get max 3 hours. the rest will be allowed to roam free. I'd hate to be in that exclusive group.

    m10

  26. This is good by Jalwin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Due to the prevalence of these cafes and the ungodly amount of time younger kids WASTE here, hopefully these laws will encourage these kids to do other more productive things in their free time. Kids are not known to be responsible, especially on items good for their own welfare. I'm not saying a little wasted time is a bad thing, but spending so much time on these type of games can have a serious negative impact on the social life of the kids and their school grades. I know several people who have dropped out of college or have trouble holding jobs due to these addictions. Granted, I'm sure some kids will find ways to get around this (like alternate between cafes). But it is the hassle of doing so that will hopefully encourage kids to limit themselves.

    1. Re:This is good by thaylin · · Score: 1

      But this is an issue that should be regulated by their parents not their government. If parents are being so poor with decisions as to allow their kids to play 8 hours of games a day they should look at some sort of ways to get those kids away from those parents as it is obvious that they care little, or into a way to let families have more time together then working those parents to death.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
  27. double lifes by Zeca · · Score: 1

    I can see alot of parents signing up for thier young to pass the ban and keep the kids from nagging them. Kids plays online all day, dads at work gets a call from the goverment saying he has a double life and locks him away... Matrix anyone?

  28. I think I speak for all of the Legashi in Azshara by florin · · Score: 1

    when I say.. thank god

  29. That ought to be interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to this:

    http://www.logoi.com/notes/common_chinese_names.ht ml

    "Over 50% of all Chinese people have one of these nine Chinese family names. And just 50 different family names are sufficient to name 90% of the population of China, that is, over a billion people."

    I never thought about it, but how *do* they keep track of a zillion people with the same name? I can't imagine what their phone books must look like.

    1. Re:That ought to be interesting... by Spudtrooper · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine what their phone books must look like.

      A lot of Chins, hence the saying.

  30. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by networkBoy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Sadly I don't have mod points for you, but I agree 100%
    I have notice a clear striation in class where a certain style of music (gansta rap) becomes the norm. It's kind of interesting to me that in this "lower class" the rap music dominates, while in even mid-level classes there is an much wider breadth of music.
    -nB

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  31. Not so bad... by Hikaru79 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Perhaps I'm the only one (and thus I will be modded into oblivion) but I don't think this is so bad. We are, after all, talking about minors here. As a poster above mentioned, America (lots of countries, actually) doesn't allow drinking under the age of 21; why is this? Because minors are not capable of responsibly handling something like alcohol. Well, guess what: most minors aren't capable of responsibly handling gaming either if they feel the need to do it in a public venue for more than THREE FREAKING HOURS per day! Three hours! That's almost 25% of your waking time playing a game. Notice that this does not restrict adults, and it does not constrict what anyone (including minors) do in the privacy of their own home. If any kid is so addicted that limiting his net-cafe time to three hours a day sounds like a terrible punishment, they are in need of help.

    I'm 19, so I'm in the same ballpark; I dunno what Chinese society is like firsthand, but I sure as hell don't have more than three hours a day to dedicate to a single asinine activty every single day. In my opinion, anyone who does much more than three hours of gaming in internet cafe's a day is quite analogous to someone with a substance abuse problem; they're both physically damaging, overly time-consuming, money-wasting, and socially awkward.

    1. Re:Not so bad... by Obsidian+Dagger · · Score: 0

      I read the article twice and saw no reason to think it it not have the limits at home. In fact the restriction is in the software not the cafes so it appears to restrict regardless of location.

      --
      "It is not my intent to offend, but if offense is taken, the fault lies with the audience." attributed to Patrick Henry
    2. Re:Not so bad... by Sefert · · Score: 1

      3 hours is almost 25% of your waking time? You spend less than 12 hours a day awake? That would indeed be a cause for concern!

    3. Re:Not so bad... by MeanderingMind · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you have the internet at home in China, chances are your parents are realtively wealthy. They might be willing to sign the account off under their name, effectively bypassing the "under 18" restriction.

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    4. Re:Not so bad... by kebes · · Score: 1

      I mostly agree with your comment, and hope it gets modded-up. However:

      Notice that this does not restrict adults, and it does not constrict what anyone (including minors) do in the privacy of their own home.

      That's where you are very, very wrong. It may not restrict adult's gameplay (for now), but the only way to enforce these rules is, as mentioned, using "registration" and "ID cards" and things like that. This type of tracking most definately imposes a restriction on minors and adults alike, and very specifically on their privacy. In fact, in a country like China, I'm sorry to say that this would have a chilling effect even if the data thereby obtained were not used for anything nefarious.

      Freedom and privacy are very important things (yes, even to minors!). All too often our freedoms are slowly eroded by heaping on enough of these seemingly innocuous laws (especially the "but its for the children" kind of laws). It may seem silly, but, yes, we must take a stand against these kinds of seemingly-good laws.

    5. Re:Not so bad... by xzqx · · Score: 1

      Maybe we should restrict heroin usage here to 3 hits a day.

    6. Re:Not so bad... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      . As a poster above mentioned, America (lots of countries, actually) doesn't allow drinking under the age of 21; why is this?

      Because of outdated puritanical "think of the children!" hysterical attitudes.

      Because minors are not capable of responsibly handling something like alcohol.

      If you don't let them try, they obviously won't be. Kids who are raised around alcohol and taught to use it properly have few problems drinking as teenagers. Kids who have never touched the stuff frequently die of alcohol poisoning on their 21st birthday.

      Prohibition is never the answer.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  32. That makes sense... by catdevnull · · Score: 1

    The government just wants to bust the "geek" wrap those Asian kids get at school...

    Sorry. I was channeling Don Imus.

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
  33. swap the word "game" with "drug" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's how harmful the kids' gaming activities are right now in China. The kids are doing this without going to school/getting sick/stealing money.
    DON'T attach everything with human rights please.

  34. Chinese Party Youth League moves meeting by davidwr · · Score: 4, Funny

    The 24x7 Chinese Communist Party Youth League meetings in popular role-playing games have been rescheduled to 1700-2000 hours, effective August 1.

    Unchanged is the mandatory attendance policy.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  35. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by CogDissident · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I do have black friends, and even a black girlfriend, which is why I said that I am not racist. Notice how I did not specifically say anything about gangsta rap being specifically black culture? I see just as many low class (grew up among them, actually) white kids getting into it.

  36. thank-god-they-got-something-right by kad77 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As much as I find it amusing to see these MMORPG wastoids be voluntary drawn out of society (I do oppose the China's big brother methods, though), I am happy to see a force intervening.

    These sad souls need guidance, rehab, a life, something outside the warm cocoon of fat rolls and 3d dwarf landscapes.

    1. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 3, Interesting

      These sad souls need guidance, rehab, a life, something outside the warm cocoon of fat rolls and 3d dwarf landscapes.

      On the contrary, one ought to decide for himself if he wants to live in the ``cocoon of fat rolls and 3d dwarf landscapes.'' Through observation, it has been noticed that children of a certain age are unable to make this decision for themselves (though, I must say that 18 is far too old to be considered the time one becomes an adult. It should be 16, in my opinion), it is the duty of parents to make this decision. Never the government. I would much rather see my children spending 24 hours a day playing silly games than be regulated in those matters by the state.

    2. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1, Interesting

      What about children without parents? Should there be a government policy for foster children?

      I think the distinction between "government" and "family" is actually a little artificial. In some sense, the family is the smallest unit of government, to which certain tasks are delegated. This is definitely the theory of many mid-century social theorists, including Althusser.

    3. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by ultranova · · Score: 4, Interesting

      These sad souls need guidance, rehab, a life, something outside the warm cocoon of fat rolls and 3d dwarf landscapes.

      Without commenting on your arrogant assertion that you know how someone else should live their live, this rises up a rather interesting point: why does the Chinese government want children to spend their time in reality rather than virtual reality ? After all, people playing WoW are far less likely to demand freedom or engage in other activities antithethical to the Chinese political system than people spending their time speaking with each other and perhaps coming up with dangerous ideas lie freedom from censorship. Warm cocoon makes people drowsy, cold reality shocks them wide awake. The former makes it far easier for the Chinese government to stay in power than the latter.

      Is this a case of a tyrant starting to believe his own lies about his benevolence, or does the Chinese government just have absolute confidence in their iron fist ?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hoggoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > I think the distinction between "government" and "family" is actually a little artificial

      I think this is one of the most wrong things I've ever read.

      A parent has a direct compelling desire to protect and nurture his/her child. The parent has intimate knowledge and experience of that child's unique requirements. The parent has a genetic drive to insure the child's welfare. I can tell you as a parent that this drive is powerful and in the same realm as the drive for food and shelter. I feel the need to care for my child the same way I feel the need to eat.

      The "government" is not a single entity, but the resultant vector of millions of competing agendas and forces. As such it doesn't "care" for any child and it doesn't have knowledge of any child. It can only set broad policies that hopefully indirectly cause "good" but often cause "bad" in it's pursuit of particular agendas.

      Corporations and Governments are not people. They are not living entities, although we often treat them as such legally.
      To say the "government" can care for a child is simply incorrect. A teacher, a nanny, a social worker, a lawyer and a congressman may be affecting a child, but there is no such person as "the government".

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    5. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      What about children without parents? Should there be a government policy for foster children?

      Those children should be adopted by families or sent to private orphanages.

      I think the distinction between "government" and "family" is actually a little artificial. In some sense, the family is the smallest unit of government, to which certain tasks are delegated.

      Whether or not the family is considered a unit of government is not very relevant in itself. It shouldn't be considered a unit of government, for the following reason:

      It should be the government's job to insure that people can productively live in a society, without interfering with each other's rights. People who are in other people's custody (such as with parents and children) have certain rights denied, and transferred to the custodians, for the duration of their custody (e.g. right to property). Any belief or habit, as long as it does not interfere with another's, should not be regulated by the state, because the interests of the people who would make the regulations are inherently contradictory to the interests of the people they are regulating. This can be clearly seen with China, where the state needs workers, and thus wants the kids to work/learn. The kids do not want to work/learn (whether or not that is good is irrelevant).

      Playing games may not be as big of a deal, but consider religion. It is almost always in a government's interests that people do not believe in a religion, because that places someone in a superior position to the state (i.e. the God). Thus, the interests of the government and the people are contradictory. Since there are more people than government officials, the people should win.

    6. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      You make the case for the family being the smallest organ of the state when you observe that it is the government's job to ensure that people can live productively in a society...

      Parents are expected - legally - to make sure their children receive an adequate education, are generally care for, are kept out of inappropriate places, etc. Parents who fail to do these things will lose their children and possibly face criminal charges.

      I'm not necessarily defending this policy on the part of China, mind you. Simply observing that it is part of a continuum of the two-way delegation of expectations between families and other state institutions.

      The family is not the same as it ever was, and is not the same in different places and contexts. The modern family, with the father as a homeowning/managing authority figure (though the division of labor between the parents is changing), is different from the kind of family situation one finds in pre-modern times and non-modern societies. It isn't as if the modern American nuclear family has had a static existence for centuries, and the state just happened to pop in one day: the historical relationship between state and family is very deep, very old, and very dynamic.

    7. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Wite_Noiz · · Score: 1

      I would guess that dead and obese people are as good workers.
      As you've probably read, China does appear to have more of a interwebs addiction problem than the rest of the world.

    8. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Corporations and governments are as much "people" as family are. In fact, many corporations and governments are family, as in family businesses and monarchies. Or, to reverse it, "families" (in any given form) are as conceptual as governments are.

      I should say "the state" rather than "government," really, to be more precise. The family is the smallest unit of the state - it has expectations delegated to it and responsibilities assigned to it. That there is an emotional element is not at issue: many people involved in corporations and other organizations are passionate, focused, driven, etc. Adoptive parents show sometimes greater care than "natural" parents, if I'm reading your claim of "direct compelling desire" as some kind of claim of innate connection (which, even if there is some truth to it, probably applies only to the mother-child bond in early childhood.)

      We exist in a network of institutions in modernity: family, school, work, government. These institutions can be said to constitute the state system in toto - authority is distributed between them, each creates an expected "self" by which individuals are understood to exist. Yes, there is probably more affective content in the family-to-self relationship than the government-to-self, but that only goes to show - even more disturbingly - that affect is part of the glue of the system. A mother who doesn't love their child enough, as determined by a court of law, can lose it: custody battles are often about a legal evaluation of the emotional environment of a home.

    9. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lurker2288 · · Score: 1

      Do you really think it's in the interests of the typical government to eliminate religious belief? What about that whole "opiate of the masses" concept, and the idea that the possibility of paradise in the next life enables people to accept a lousy situation in this life? And don't you think the government would love to have a population of true believers (assuming that the government's goals can be aligned, however uneasily, with religious belief?) Do you think George W. Bush would still be in office right now if he didn't convince a significant proportion of the U.S. voters that he's doing the Lord's work?

    10. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      > I think the distinction between "government" and "family" is actually a little artificial.

      You made me puke a little bit.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    11. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      Lemmy, you may have noticed that my arguments were not a reflection of the current state of events, but rather the ideal state of events.

      I do not think that parents should make education mandatory, especially in terms of attendance to schools. It may be the parent's responsibility that children are not beaten, deprived of food, etc. but any regulation beyond a minimum on testing is superfluous, in my opinion. If a test is repeatedly failed, then the parents should be fined, but not deprived of children. That will remove the incentive for parents that want to save money by having their kids work and keep them from school.

    12. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      If Bush is convincing people that he is doing the Lord's work, then he can do that not because they are religious, but because they are uneducated. Wars are inherently against religion. In fact, the only time that religion is in the government's best interest is when the government is the deity, such as Ancient Egypt and Rome. Thankfully, that is no longer the case in modern times.

      Sure, occasionally, religion helps the government escape some blame (e.g. Katrina was the work of God, and its damage not our liability). However, in most cases, people will eventually realize that ``Trust not in the Sons of Princes, in whom there is no salvation'' entirely applies to their life.

    13. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by harves · · Score: 1

      Please note that the grandparent said "family" not "parent". If you've been part of a large family, than you know that it often is "the resultant vector of [a number] of competing agendas and forces". The grandparent's point is that a family is simply the most local form of government, with the fewest number of vectors. You completely missed that point.

      I agree that the government cannot care for a child - individuals care for children. The exact same thing can be said of a family. Children don't fare well if the family cares for them; they fare better if they have an individual (or more) caring for them.

    14. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      Lemmy, as I mentioned in a different sub-thread, it is pointless to argue about the current state of events; let's, rather, discuss ideals.

      The government's incentive for children's well-being is entirely against the incentives of the parent, and, most importantly, of the child himself. The government needs money, which it gains from taxes. Taxes it gets from citizens, and to attract citizens, among other things, it needs a high educational rating. Thus, the government wants kids to do well on tests. The parents want kids to grow up well-educated and intelligent people. Thankfully, this usually works together, but if the government had its way, kids would go to school on Saturday, Sunday, and during the summer. The current system is a compromise, but an unnecessary one. Parents should have decision over their children's lives, because the parents are, for the most part, thinking about the incentives of the kids, not of themselves.

    15. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Where does "government" come from? What were the first states and political structures? What was the logic of feudal ownership and rule?

      They were families. Feudal land was family-owned land, and power grew from the relationship between that family and the land they owned. In other societies, kinship groups formed the basis of state authority, even among nomadic peoples.

      Also, "family" has meant many different things in many different cultures. Sometimes it was loose association. Sometimes it is entirely matrilineal (children grow up without a relationship to their father in extended families - usually with uncles as male figures. Still a common family system in many parts of the world, including among an ethnic group in China, near Tibet.) Children were moved around from household to household in pre-modern Japan, and men could get adopted into the households of their spouses: the "family unit" was a distributed concept.

      In all cases, the relationship between the nature of family and the nature of power has been a strong one.

    16. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      I don't believe in universal ideals. There are different interests that play off against each other, instead.

      I want the government to restrain other people's kids and indulge mine. I want my kid to have access to the best of schools, but I don't want to have my kid schooled at a place where there are kids who, by my own definition, are unruly, undisciplined, and unfocused (even though it is quite possible that at the "best" schools, my own child might be considered lacking, due to behavioral codes, habits and tastes that were inculcated in my child based on their being, um, my child.)

      We tend to think of "natural," "normal," and baseline those things that resemble ourselves, or our idealized notion of ourselves, and then universalize them. This is really the basis of so many "ideal" concepts of politics.

      Incidentally, I don't think the government wants kids to go to school on Saturday, et. al. For one thing, it's expensive and exhausting - easier to have parents look after the kids on their own dime. For another, the state likes kids which consume products. The state likes kids that are integrated into the local community.

      And, ultimately, believe it or not, we are the state. We want kids to be disciplined, restrained, reliable, and responsible. We pay for cops to deal with other peoples' kids. "The government" didn't show up at the door one day and screw up what had been an ideal society - we actively participate in the production of the state every day.

    17. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      You are simply saying that your interests do not coincide with the interests of other parents. This may be true, but it is irrelevant.

      The government is simply a collection of people. Moreover, it is a bureaucracy, and different people have different powers. Those people inevitably act in their own interest, rather than in the interests of the people. This is partially because, as you said, the interests of the people are contradictory among themselves. But mostly, it is due to basic human nature.

      Also, I disagree that we are the state, because we do not have power over others. The state gets funding from us, true, but that is it.

    18. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by FooBarWidget · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's because of the culture. I don't know whether you've noticed, but Asian parents tend to put a lot of value in studying. They want their children to study hard and to go to a good university and to get a good job. The thought of your own child being addicted to games and neglecting school is the fear of every Chinese parent.

      You know, not every government decision has to be associated with suppression and regime.

    19. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by m0rph3us0 · · Score: 1

      When you ask the government to "restrain other people's kids and indulge mine" what happens if that now that the government has this power and the majority are in control what they do is: "restrain YOUR kids and indulge other people's kids" because your views are not in the majority. You may participate in the production of the state, I participate in the destruction of the state.

      I do this by trying to consume more services of the state than I pay for. And generally making the state expend the most resources possible for the least amount of action.

      That is why when people complain that politicians do nothing I applaud, because NOTHING is the best possible thing the state can do.

    20. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Do you really think consuming "the state's" resources is going to be a problem that undoes the state?

      What it does is mobilize the state even more. When the service-providing aspect of the state gets overloaded with freeloaders, it mobilizes the executive, police aspect of the state to maintain control. You think you're being naughty, but you're actually a kind of low-rent Emmanuel Goldstein.

    21. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      You realize it is the 21st century and not the 10th century. The US Executive Branch is just a tad different than a family land owner ruling over his serfs. Perhaps in your mind they are the same, but I don't see a practical way to compare them or apply the same concepts to each other.

      The idea of a family unit is quite a bit different than the past, in some ways the definition is stricter, in other ways it is looser.

      Your idea doesn't justify socialism. It just shows our difference in a definition.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    22. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the family is the smallest unit of government, to which certain tasks are delegated"

      Aaah .. I've heard this before.. but only in communist/marxist countries.

      I chose to escape to Switzerland instead.. here its the other way around: we delegate to government if and only if theres *absolutely* no other way around it. SOVEREIGN INDIVIDUALS delegate to the government - to imply the opposite indicates that the Government owns you and you're merely a slave, standing in line waiting for the next work tasks to be distributed by the Government.

      Anyone who thinks that the distinction between "family" and "Government" is artificial should seriously consider relocating to the DRPK.

    23. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by lazyl · · Score: 1

      It should be the government's job to insure that people can productively live in a society, without interfering with each others rights.

      That's an extreme Libertarian philosophy. The opposite extreme is Communism (which China is desperately trying to cling too). Both of those systems can be perfect in theory, but in practice they both cause a large imbalance in the quality of life across the population. i.e. They can produce some extremely rich people and some extremely poor people, or some people with many freedoms and some people with no freedoms, or more likely a combination of both (since wealth and 'effective' freedom are often closely linked). A more practical system to minimize those effects, which nearly all current governments are based on, is something in the middle.

      --
      Aw crap, ninjas!
    24. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      My goal isn't to "justify" anything. I don't believe in one-size-fits-all optimal solutions. We have our political agendas that, ultimate, have something to do with our self-interests and self-images.

      What I'm against is facile political and social ontologies that assume what they intend to "prove." I'm against sloppy thinking and thought which is based on categories which are neither universal nor given, but historical. I have a Marxian way of looking at things, I'll admit, but I don't really advocate socialism or capitalism or such. (Advocacy is, really, a failure of Marxism - ultimately, politics moves by the settling out of different blocs of interest.) As far as this discussion goes, I'm generally anti-state, but I see the "state" as being much more convulated than the existence of a handful of regulations and laws. I see it as a pervasive organization of society itself, whatever form of legitimacy it has.

      Since you seem to have a libertarian bent, though, I'll simply note that it is the very classes that you think benefit from libertarianism - the bulk of hardworking middle-class families - that prop up the state as we know it, from schools to armie to public works to social services - more than any other. And they do it because they perceive - correctly, really - that it is in their interests to do so.

      The real point is two-fold: the governmental state organizes, delegates to, and makes expectations of the family household to produce the subject-citizens over which it governs, and that the family unit will re-construct governmentality on its own. Watch the Sopranos lately?

    25. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Sovereign individuals?

      If I don't send my kid to a school in Switzerland, there's no problem? If I let them sit in their own filth, it's not an issue? If I'm a 10 year old that wants to leave home, there's no obstacles? Schools aren't licensed? There isn't a comprehensive examination system?

      I think the "sovereignty" is itself selectively designed to get the individual to police themselves enough to save the state the effort to do so. I doubt Switzerland is very different that way.

    26. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm a Libertarian. I admit it. That is, I believe that above all, people's rights and freedoms must be protected (the exact reasons for these are complex, and have also to do with my religious beliefs).

      However, I recognize that in order for a society to function, certain rights need to be curbed, in order for other rights to exist. For example, I believe there should be a ``right to safety'', which specifies that people have a right not to be hurt, etc. However, there is also a right to movement with a knife, and if a person stabs someone else, what happens? If you stop the stabber, you are infringing on his rights. If you rule in the favor of the stabber, you infringe on the other guy's right of safety.

      In that particular case, I would rule in favor of the stabbee, because the stabber is the one infringing on his right to safety; the stabbee is not doing anything himself. But, regardless, I believe that such a society (in which the government's sole job is to protect the rights of its citizens) can work, even if it may cause some people to be very poor. I believe that being poor but with your rights is more important than being moderately well-off, but with less rights.

    27. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Funny thing is extreme Libertarians are essentially Anarchists, and Marxists are supposed to be Anarchists with the idea that such a society can only succeed once they have been weened from the burden of the assumptions that we must have personal property. The goal of a Marxist government should be to eliminate itself and allow humanity to continue on without its guidance.

      My family is nothing like the Sopranos. A middle class WASP family is massively different than what you have in mind; a family unit as a mini-government.

      I can leave my family household if I find them to be disagreeable. I cannot leave my country if I find them disagreeable, nor should I. Before you tell me I can leave my country, tell me this where would I go? I can't even move to Antarctica without some World Government arresting me.

      Like the Sopranos a government expresses itself against its people with the use of force. If you a for government, then you are for the use of force against people to coerce them into doing things they might not otherwise do. And in nearly all governments this use of force breaks down to being physical violence, are you for physical violence?

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    28. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      Switzerland - that's the place where you can (and will) be fined for flushing the toilet at the wrong time, isn't it? Perhaps you only got as far as the fact that everyone has a gun at home before deciding that it's a libertarian's paradise.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    29. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by gamemank · · Score: 1

      So in other words, you are a leech and YOU are what's wrong with the government. (well, one of the things).

      Lemmy, I agree with all your ideas, well put.

    30. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      My point about the Sopranos is that they create their own government, both internally and within the community. If the "public" government disappeared, there is little that would keep family/private "governments" like the Sopranos from taking hold. Without a governmental authority, those functions currently under the purview of the civil government would have to be handled privately, either within your own family or by others. However, it would still require all the exercise of power.

      Libertarians are anarchists who either hope that everyone will subscribe to a set of principles about property that will serve only some of the people, on a voluntary basis, or who believe that people - all people - are generally rational, responsible middle-class agents who will defer their own pleasure, focus on running a household, etc - or at least will stay out of the way of those who don't, and who will resolve conflicts peacefully, and who will somehow coordinate their capital into organs for large-scale projects without creating quasi-governmental institutions. I don't mean to pick on libertarians per se - I think most Marxists and, indeed, most people in general who entertain utopian ideas of one sort or another try to pick and choose the types of people who will populate it, so that they can imagine it existing without force. The real irony is that libertarianism as an ideal is actually based on a fantasy of a classless society, and that even though I'm nominally Marxist (in my analysis, if not my prescription), I don't believe a classless society is remotely realistic, particularly in the era of globalization.

      But I think that this is a digression. What was on topic was the relationship between governments, families, and pedagogy: what the limits of public policy about what happens in the home are, what the relationship between in-the-home and not-in-the-home is. My real contention is that the modern family already is a quasi-governmental institution, that governmentality and family structure are intertwined, and that really, it's a matter of degree for any given country just what kind of role the extra-familial authority will have.

    31. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      That test alone still leaves the family as an organ of the state: even moreso, simply without necessarily having the resources to fulfill its mandates. As it is, that is more or less the current state of affairs, except for the public funding of schools - there is still home schooling, etc.

      Besides, how do you ensure that children are not being beaten, sexually abused, deprived of food, etc? It requires a substantial social and legal apparatus to make those determinations. And then there's the question of medical care.

      As soon as there is a "should," (other than as a moral category) there is the question of force and power. I think we would agree that parents should not be free to create communal societies in which 5 year olds are allowed to be used as sexual objects, and perhaps you may even agree that children should not be left un-vaccinated for diseases like polio. Even these broad dictums require governmental force (and there are religious/cultish communities who, without that force, would practice just those behaviors) and, as a consequence, the public creation and enforcement of a set of standards and expectations for parenting.

    32. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      In another sub-thread, I have mentioned that my ideal government would exist solely for the protection of people's rights (with right to safety being one of them). When there is a conflict of rights (such as when someone wants to stab someone else, and either the right of safety, or the right of movement with a knife would be infringed), the government defends the person who did not initiate the infringement (in other words, the person being stabbed).

      Children should have the right to safety, and also to sexual chastity, at least to a certain age. If the parents are infringing on those rights, then sure, they should be prevented from doing so (for example, by means of punishment).

      As for education, I retract my statement. Children should not be forced to take a test, or to get any education. However, if they declare that they want to do so, the parents should be forced to provide it, because by refusing, they are infringing on the kid's right to education.

    33. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Then you cannot be a Marxist, you must be a Leninist. Which is just as well, Lenin had far more disclosure on his theories and philosophies, and in general was a much better writer than Marx. Lenin believed there must be a ruling class to organize and control the working class. And that a communist state would have to be perpetual rather than a stepping stone to anarchy.

      I'm in actuality a constitutional Libertarian, I don't see a point in the Government extending beyond what was already stated in the constitution. Minimalist government is not an ideal utopia, it's a compromise because we all know that anarchy is impractical. We still need cops to hand out speeding tickets to discourage people from risking my safety by driving too fast.

      The issue I take with your rough comparison between families and governments is that family structure varies greatly within a single nation, and that you may eventually leave a family unit and create your own. I don't need force to create and maintain a family, but I do need force to create a new government.

      A family exists because there are people in the family unit that unable (for one reason or another) to take complete responsibility for their actions. In this your socialist ideal government is the same, typically the government assume responsibility over its people. But that means treating adults as children, and perhaps I'm cynically, but if you treat adults as children do not be surprised if they behave like children.

      FWIW China's communism is moving quickly towards a capitalist's "utopia" free market. And freedoms for personal property keep progressing in China. Why would China abandon socialism unless there was some advantage to it. (I'd say it allows them to compete in the global market far more effectively)

      I will admit that it is a fuzzy line between where a government should and should not interfere with family affairs. And it's a question that has been on the table for centuries and will likely never have an answer that is satisfactory to everyone. But a fuzzy line doesn't mean I believe that the two structures are the same thing.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    34. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by m0rph3us0 · · Score: 1

      But aren't we all government? Maybe we should just get rid of the services all the leeches like me use, so you won't have to pay for my free ride.

    35. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a 17 year old, I can attest that I definitely couldn't handle being an "adult" at 16, and probably still couldn't handle it well right now. The arbitrary age line is useless anyway; plenty of "adults" make poorer choices than me on a daily basis, while I know people my age and younger who can make intelligent, informed decisions like an adult.

      My first post on Slashdot; now I really feel like a nerd.

    36. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      Well, my dear nerd, what about being an adult could you not handle? Sure, perhaps you could not provide for yourself. That does not mean you should not have the right to vote, own property, etc.

      Being an adult does not mean you have to move out. It simply means you have the legal right to do so.

      P.S. If you truly want to feel like a nerd, I'd get a Slashdot account first.

    37. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      I take Lenin seriously, but I'm not a Leninist either. Nor a Maoist.

      The writers to whom I'm closest are Zizek and Althusser, and perhaps, through them, a Hegelian as much as a Marxist. And because I'm actually a member of the middle class, I'm pretty much invested in things that are in the interests of the middle class in terms of my actual political activism: I want to lower my own tax burden, have taxes spent on projects that benefit me, etc. Like any good Marxist, I'm aware of my class interests (which don't happen to be those of the working class) and I pursue them, within the boundaries of my ethics. In some ways, in my skepticism about the perfectibility of the human condition, I'm actually a Burkean conservative. And I'm interested in certain European conservatives as well, particularly Chantal del Sol and Alain de Benoist.

      I think the crude "libertarians versus socialists" approach to political discourse in geek circles is intellectually embarrassing, partially because it treats political systems like a game of Civilization. One science fiction author lamented how too much libertarian sci-fi was built around the "a-ha!" moment in which it was revealed that everything would Just Work Out if the Gummint would go away (again, as if the government had shown up one day at the door step, instead of being produced and sustained on a daily basis by people pursuing their interests.)

      That said, one writer who does work at the intersection of geek political ontology and the limits of possibility, whose work I generally like, is Ken MacLeod.

    38. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by jma05 · · Score: 1

      > why does the Chinese government want children to spend their time in reality rather than virtual reality ?

      As of now, Chinese govt is more capable of controlling reality as perceived by it's citizens than the content details of the games they play.

    39. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by johansalk · · Score: 1

      Lies? They are actually a benevolent government. The Chinese record in universal health, literacy and education, poverty eradication, rural development, and so on is exemplary for other nations to follow. The main comparison is with India, which had a similar situation to China 50 years ago. But China has done much better than India on those.

    40. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we should just get rid of the services all the leeches like me use, so you won't have to pay for my free ride.

      But then a large percentage of the leeches will become muggers instead. I would prefer that some of my tax money goes to making the leeches fat and lazy, given the alternative is being whacked on the street corner for a few bills in my pocket. Street crime is inversely proportional to welfare spending.

    41. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by mijkal · · Score: 1

      Wars are inherently against religion. Never read the Bible then (particularly the Old Testament), have you? Or the Quran? It's full of wars and calls to violence in the name of god/allah/jehovah. And genocide. Et al.
    42. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A parent has a direct compelling desire to protect and nurture his/her child. Wrong.

      The parent has intimate knowledge and experience of that child's unique requirements.A parent has a direct compelling desire to protect and nurture his/her child. The parent has intimate knowledge and experience of that child's unique requirements. Wrong, wrong and wrong.

      Just look at the child abuse statistics. We need government legislation (etc.) for the matter. I fully agree limiting game play by government is utterly ridiculous, but your claims are hugely utopistic.
    43. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hahafaha · · Score: 1

      OK, let me rephrase that. Political wars are inherently against religion. Also worth noting is that most calls to violence, etc. is actually the result of people with power in a religion, bending it to their advantage, rather than the original intents of the religion.

    44. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > Just look at the child abuse statistics.

      No system is perfect.

      I will compare any 100 parents drawn at random against 100 orphanage governesses, social workers, even day-care teachers any day.
      Or choose any other representative of government 'caring' for children.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    45. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      ...it is the duty of parents to make this decision. Never the government.

      Never? I think it's absolutely dangerous to speak in absolutes. If an entire nation is floundering (although China's economy is hardly floundering) because of a problem that people can't or won't solve on their own, then it makes sense for government to do it for them. China is obviously less hesitant to enact such restrictions because of the nature of its government, but that doesn't mean it's inherently wrong. We do similar things in the US. As you may have noticed, we limit the age, hours, and circumstances of young drivers. Most states limit the ages for gambling, drinking, and smoking because they're enjoyable and addictive, but largely unproductive/damaging behaviors. If online gaming is an addictive and unproductive behavior (as many would argue it is), AND parents are unable/unwilling to curtail its spread, then it becomes necessary for some higher authority to step in. In the US, we would probably tackle the problem on a case-by-case basis, challenging parents who fail to provide proper guidelines for their children. (Little Johnny never does his homework, can't read at grade level, and is failing out because he plays games all night). In another country, they've obviously decided it's more efficient to take more drastic measures. That's the great thing about having more than one country in the world, just like having multiple states in the US -- others are free to experiment so we can see what works and what doesn't.

      Naturally it would be easier to condone China's actions if they were truely democratic, but they are no more violating human rights on this than we are with our own restrictions on minors.

    46. Re:thank-god-they-got-something-right by lazyl · · Score: 1

      I believe that being poor but with your rights is more important than being moderately well-off, but with less rights. ... I believe that such a society can work, even if it may cause some people to be very poor.

      I don't believe you would feel the same if you were really poor. And I don't mean homeless-in-new-york poor, I mean Malawi or Somalia poor. A society that doesn't help those people is not ideal. I think you're still talking about something in the middle of the spectrum: a little bit poor with a lot of freedoms vs a little bit richer with fewer freedoms. A pure Libertarian system would be far more extreme.

      Let me put it this way: Libertarian is about making sure everyone has equal rights, Communism is about making sure everyone has equal wealth. They both have opposite, equally bad problems: in a Libertarian system you get a huge imbalance between the rich and the poor (because you're not allowed to tax the rich to help the poor), and in a Communism system you get a huge imbalace in freedoms (there's the group of people who make the rules and the group of people who follow them). An ideal system, IMO, is something in the middle which focuses on making sure everone has the same standard of living. That means keeping a balance between both individual rights and individual wealth. And that's bascially the type of government that we have now (not that's it's perfect - a long way off for sure).

      The only reason Libertarianism is not as widely denounced as Communism is because it has a tendancy to naturally evolve into a more moderate system before things starting getting too bad. When America was first founded it was very strongly Libertarian but has moved quite a bit away from that extreme since then. The wiki entry for Libertarianism has a lot of good info.

      --
      Aw crap, ninjas!
  37. Law is aimed at the wrong age group by netglen · · Score: 1

    Too bad that legal and underground Internet cafes in China are now the new Opium Dens. It's the adult crowd in China that is really abusing the system. They get more money going into the online game gold trade/farming gig then they would with a real mundane job.

  38. if only... by misanthrope101 · · Score: 1

    If only parents would limit their children's TV watching. In China, the USA, anywhere. Videogames are a good deal better (or at least less deleterious) for your brain than TV, I'd wager. Videogames may not make you smarter, but they don't actively make you know less than you did before, do they?

  39. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worst troll ever.

    http://www.blackpeopleloveus.com/, much?

  40. Government != Parent by wcspxyx · · Score: 1

    Nice to see the US doesn't have a monopoly on the government telling people how to be parents.

    --
    Sig? What sig? Do I have to have a sig!?!?
  41. Also... by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The USA does this quite a bit, and we really don't have so many subversive groups, because the way that it is done makes their subversive groups look like fringe crazies.

    It helps a lot that in many cases, the subversive groups are fringe crazies.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Also... by CogDissident · · Score: 4, Funny

      Arguably, so are most of our elected officials.

  42. All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by unity100 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and wake up now -

    if you BAR kids from doing something they REALLY like and WANT to do in their development stages, and instead FORCE them to do whatever society/you think right and should be done, what you do is going to come back to you as payback when kids reach adulthood and start to exhibit personality/psychological deviations.

    ANYTHING that is suppressed gets bigger and strikes back at a later date.

    this same trend was here in turkey aroun 15-20 years ago, all kids were put to the "career race", which was something that was seen as both good for the kids, and for the society. (hey, you make the kid race for ranking at the top in the national university entrance exams, which guarantees them a good education and then later a respectable, high salary job, what can be wrong with that)

    and 15 years later now, majority of those generations are experiencing personality quirks, antisocial behaviour, a degree of childish selfishness, (which leads to MANY marriages to breaking up), strike-back from stress that is accrued in 15 years of organizational education/racing, aimlessness in life and valueing/judging everything on merits of career/power/monetary values and not able to appreciate real values like love, compassion, friendship, family and so on. hell, there are so many stuff that i dont know if i can stop once i start.

    you, chinese are total morons for approving that, or forcing your kids to forfeit their present for their future, a future which never comes and constant sacrifice continues while trying to reach it.

    time spent NEVER comes back. NEVER EVER. at deathbed what people think are what they HAVE done, not what they MEANT to do.

    1. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that include barring kids from
      1) drinking alcohol until they are 21?
      2) bullying other kids?
      3) Gambling?
      4) killing other kids at school?

      Because that seems to work pretty well for the majority of kids. Of course there are anomalies but generally kids are like other citizens. They have to learn how to obey the society restriction regardless of age.

    2. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by poticlin · · Score: 1

      forcing your kids to forfeit their present for their future,

      I'm sure playing 5 hours a day of WOW will make any kids future brighter!

      "Can't do math but surely can tell you how to defeat onyxia with only 2 Shammies!"

      It's a question of perspective.
    3. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by MeanderingMind · · Score: 1

      I think what he is getting at is the tendency for people to abhor what they are forced to do, or what they are forced to not do.

      That the majority of kids seem fine and well adjusted isn't the issue at all. Despite not being alcoholics, alpha bullies, chronic gamblers, or excessively violent there are very few that do not consider or actively dabble in such things because of the forceful methods by which they are forbidden. It's not obvious, but the rules are still broken.

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    4. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by unity100 · · Score: 1

      it makes their PRESENT brighter.

      a future in a high position high salary career job together with constant prozac or shrink visits is not some "bright" future, dont forget.

    5. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      nah, it will just tranform their present to the same uncreative, brainkilling grind-shit that it is for all the other MMORPG junkies, too.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    6. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by unity100 · · Score: 1

      let THEM choose their present.

    7. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      "ANYTHING that is suppressed gets bigger and strikes back at a later date."

      Suppressing people from stealing will make more people steal? Suppressing people from murdering will result in more murderers? Sorry I don't see the logic in that.

      "you, chinese are total morons for approving that, or forcing your kids to forfeit their present for their future, a future which never comes and constant sacrifice continues while trying to reach it."

      It's the culture. Many Chinese parents were born in the 50s-60s. They've experienced the Cultural Revolution and many of them have never had proper education, so now they want their kids to have proper education and to have a better future. Of course they don't want their kids ruining their lives by spending 12 hours a day on a game. 3 hours a day spent on gaming is very reasonable (and that's excluding the time spent on, oh you know, PLAYING with other kids! And I don't mean behind a computer.) I call you a moron for not even trying to understand their point of view.

    8. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by unity100 · · Score: 1

      Suppressing people from stealing will make more people steal? Suppressing people from murdering will result in more murderers? Sorry I don't see the logic in that.

      excuse me, we are talking about GAMES, PLAYING, living their CHILDHOOD, in the context. where did stealing and murdering come from ?

      It's the culture. Many Chinese parents were born in the 50s-60s. They've experienced the Cultural Revolution and many of them have never had proper education, so now they want their kids to have proper education and to have a better future.

      same were the parents in turkey. furthermore, on top of their japanese counterparts, the concept of "family", "love", "mercy", "selfless parent" were much more in abundance in them.

      so they tried to make their kids what would be the best for them. result is this, and this is done with love.

      intentions in that subject do not change the results considerably. whatever the intention, supressed/postponed stuff strikes back.
    9. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      "excuse me, we are talking about GAMES, PLAYING, living their CHILDHOOD, in the context. where did stealing and murdering come from ?"

      From the word "ANYTHING".

      "intentions in that subject do not change the results considerably. whatever the intention, supressed/postponed stuff strikes back."

      There's a huge difference between suppressing your children from enjoying gaming and preventing game addiction from ruining their lives. I'd say 3 hours gaming per day, in combination with other non-computer-gaming recreational activities, is more than enough to live a good childhood. Heck, I'd even say non-computer-gaming recreational activities (like, you know, socializing with other kids, in real life?) are probably more healthy than computer gaming!

    10. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by unity100 · · Score: 1

      From the word "ANYTHING".

      ah well, if we go that way, i can prove that ANYTHING can be proven wrong/right with the approach you have taken.

      with other non-computer-gaming recreational activities

      yea, apparently the parents are going to be the ones to decide what the "non-computer-gaming recreational activities" are, arent they ? and curiously you have proposed that they are more "healthy", which is something that has no certain verifiable measure.

      cutting kids' games at the end of predetermined durations is just like preventing a young married couple from reaching the climax during sex - and saying that "preassigned duration is over, youll continue tomorrow".
    11. Re:All those "good for kids" morons should wake up by frostband · · Score: 1

      you, chinese are total morons for approving that

      Not sure why you're talking directly to the Chinese. The Great Firewall of China probably blocks slashdot, if not for the freespeech, then at least for the trolls.


      (Anyone in china that is actually able to read your message (by proxying, etc...) is probably among the ones that agree with you anyway)

  43. A Dangerous Game by blueZhift · · Score: 1

    The Chinese government is playing a dangerous game imposing more and more restrictions on a recreational past time enjoyed by an apparently large segment of the population. Bread and circuses are essential for an authoritarian regime to maintain power. And while it is probably easy for Chinese citizens to shrug off the lack of political freedom, it isn't so easy to ignore government interference in how one makes money (bread), or how one has fun (circuses). Given the large population of "spoiled", mostly male, young people due to the one child policy and bias towards male children realized through selective abortions, government restrictions on the recreational activities of this group carry a great risk. It would be better to have these young men wasting time in internet cafes playing WoW during their teen years, than making trouble for the regime in the real world, a world short of girls for them!

    While I don't believe that kids under 18 should be playing WoW or similar games for more than 3 hours a day, if I'm trying to keep people from growing up with a desire to overthrow the government, it'd be better to just let them have their fun. WoW hasn't caused the collapse of civilization in any other countries as yet... right?

  44. yeaa by unity100 · · Score: 1

    instead they should go to school (right from kindergarten at age 5), go through elementary, middle, high, college, grad, work their arse off for 18 years in order to be able to work their arse off MORE while working in their later life.

    so, instead of "drugs" you want them to be FORCED to modern day slavery.

  45. Re:Read the article.. not the summary- no time lim by Shemmie · · Score: 1

    Please Mod parent up for being one of the few to actually RTFA instead of automatically assuming the kids would be rounded up and shot for passing the time-limit.

  46. Take note, americans by billcopc · · Score: 1

    This could be the USA in a decade or lses. The dangerous thing here is that it is perfectly reasonable to "restrict" teenagers to 3 hours of gaming per day. What's wrong with this picture is it shouldn't be the government's job to do this, it's the parents responsibility. If families offload their parenting duties to the government, that's a very slippery slope of shaping and mind control. A generation later, we'll have these kids all grown up in these federal ways. They will be far more open to being controlled by their government... every generation will be less "free" than the last and they won't even know it.

    Me, I'm all about tough love. If the kid is left to piss away their life in front of a dumb game like Lineage, and become a worthless drain on his/her family, well that's just desserts for the failed parents. The same way a good family expects their children to provide for the family later, as if parenting were a business venture, well they should be responsible if their strategy bombs and goes bankrupt.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Take note, americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This could be the USA in a decade or lses.

      Only on slashdot, can an article about Chinese censorship remind you of how much you hate the USA.

  47. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by angryoaf · · Score: 1

    I'm black and I agree with you Cog. Besides 7 times out of 10 when people blame racism for cultural inconsistencies, the true culprit is classism or the imbalanced distribution of wealth. Upper middle class kids of any race or creed usually don't become "thug life" even if they do try to "represent" as "straight gangsta" when they are teenagers. Right before they ship off to college and, more often than not, make something of themselves... unlike poor kids who usually don't have the opportunity. Race barely has anything to do with it. (woah totally off topic)

  48. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by cyphercell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...rap is for idiots without jobs or a real culture.

    Um, poverty is a real culture. I grew up with a single mom that probably messed with drugs a bit more than she should have. Then I messed around with drugs more than I should have. I grew up in poverty and through a lot of hard work I've gotten a college education and so has my sister. The fact that we are all where we are today doesn't for an instant mean that we can't identify with music that targets those living in a "self perpetuating cycle of self-inflicted poverty and crime". The culture of poverty even the culture of crime is about improving your situation. I know it may not seem like it from the outside looking in, but drug addiction and crime are both things that many people do in order to improve their situation if only for a short time. Eating is better than not, getting high is better than jumping off a bridge. Other issues are highly emotional, it's hard when a child or relative dies because you cannot afford proper medical treatment, it's hard when someone becomes an alcoholic rather than a moderate drinker, it's hard when your parents argue every night because of bills, it's hard for people who are black and cannot afford a train ticket in order to look for work. You sit on a high horse claiming that this music contributes to the problem, when you do this you take focus away from the real problems, like drug addiction, lack of education, lack of jobs and a general lack of hope a lot kids face every day. You also apply a double standard when you don't say the same of art like Tom Sawyer, Gangs of New York, and many other stories, movies and songs that stretch back to the begining of man.

    --
    Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
  49. China's Economy by thanatos_x · · Score: 1

    Anyone ever consider that they're doing this in part because they desperately want to be world leaders (more so)? Its a position they will no doubt share (or occupy) in the future, but in order to reach it, they need to be more and more productive. I imagine as income rises, more and more children will play video games (look at the rest of the region), and having half a billion or more people hours a day going into WoW or some other MMORPG - not very productive. It'd be much better to have them studying, working, or even sleeping than having them play a MMORPG for 10 hours a day.

    And while it may be true that the under 18 crowd doesn't contribute a substantial portion to the economy, it sets up a habit which will likely continue past age 18 (which is the goal of limits on smoking or drinking - stop addiction). The time that they'd spend playing video games is also important in that it means less time will be spent studying, which has an impact on acceptance into competitive colleges and thus the rest of life...

    --
    I am not an expert. If I am misled in something, please correct me.
  50. Even worse... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    Even worse, every state in the US has laws that severely limits how much you can work under 18. It is a pretty bad situation for those people under 18 that have to support themselves.

    1. Re:Even worse... by thaylin · · Score: 1

      Last I checked this is not true. The only laws similar to this limit what time kids can be out at night, however provide exemptions for workers with the exception to a law that minors can not work after 10 or 11 pm on school nights.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    2. Re:Even worse... by Knara · · Score: 1

      These laws may also not apply to emancipated minors, but YMMV.

    3. Re:Even worse... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      http://dllr.state.md.us/labor/empm.html

      http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/publications/erd/pdf/ erd_9212_p.pdf

      http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/ChildLaborPamphlet2000. html#8

      http://198.234.41.198/w3/webwh.nsf/Files/MLLPoster .pdf/$FILE/MLLPoster.pdf

      I'm not going to go through all 50 states, but as far as I know there are not ANY states in the US that do not severely limit the number of hours a minor can work. Tell me this... What do you think a 15 year old girl is going to do when it is a crime for a legitimate employer to hire her, going to the police to report that her parents are fulfilling their legal requirements to support her will lead to her arrest, and she hasn't eaten for 3 days?

      This doesn't even take into account that they need a special permit that often cannot be obtained.

    4. Re:Even worse... by thaylin · · Score: 1

      Maybe you want to change states, or get emancipated? In my state it is very easy to get a work permit at 14, and most laws do not even cover farming work. the laws can limit you to 18 hours at 14 and 15 during school weeks, however if your parents can not support you at that age there is a problem. There is no reason a 14 or 15 year old should need to work more then 18 hours a week while attending school.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    5. Re:Even worse... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Your head is in the sand. Work permits are simply not available to minors who's parents will not support them, and the fact that a 15 year old's parents will not support this is a problem, does not change the fact that it happens all the time. I certainly don't understand how you can say that there is no reason for a 14 or 15 year old to work more than 18 hours a week to support themselves. $7.80 is the highest minimum wage in the country. That means the 15 year old (if they can even get a permit) would be trying to support themselves off of ~$550 a month. Could you support yourself on $550 a month? Of course, many of these 15 year olds cannot get a permit at all. Can you support yourself off of $0 a month?

      Saying that parents SHOULD be good to their children is no excuse for criminalizing those minors whose parents are not. And sorry to be blunt, but, whether we like it or not, our child labor laws mean that some 15 year old girl will be taking it in the ass from some random stranger tonight so that she doesn't have to go hungry tomorrow.

  51. I disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I disagree that China should make a new law that allows people under the age of 18 to play video games for a maximum of only 3 hours. Growing up you should be able to play video games as long as you want. If your parents dont mind then you should be able to. If the parents are doing a good job of parenting and control their kids to do their homework and do the dishes than it should not be this big of a problem. I think it is just outragous to actually make a law that says you cant play videogames more then 3 hours a day that is just madness.

  52. lucky kids by jimstapleton · · Score: 1

    my mom only gave me one hour of computer/video gaming when I was a kid.

    She truely was totalitarian!

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  53. Headline by Floritard · · Score: 1

    China first government to recognize what a complete waste of time MMORPGs are.

    I play games like mad but I find any game you can't get out of in at most 5 mins is more of a chore than anything. Apparently the Chinese government also favors quick action games you can jump in and out of. WoW is the type of game where a 3-hour time limit is actually a considerable roadblock. I've watched my friend play it obsessively. Don't you have to kill ostriches for at least 2 hours before anything happens? That only leaves 1 hour for "productive" play. Too bad.

  54. Scooped! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm, fellas - think you've been scooped. By 1.5 years.

    From FT, August 2005
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/89ea206a-13f3-11da-af53-00 000e2511c8.html

  55. Re:Read the article.. not the summary- no time lim by bjdevil66 · · Score: 1

    So they take the edge off of their methods - so what. It's still a repression of the basic, personal freedoms of the people they govern, and it's espeically egregious because it's repression inside their own homes. The Chinese government is still Communist, despite the roots of capitalism taking hold, and they still have a generation of old-school, "we run everyon'e lives for the good of the people" governmental officials that need to die off before real freedom can take root.

  56. "but at least we can make our own mistakes...." by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    and then go a sue any and everybody that we feel is responsible because even though we did it with full knowlage of the consiquences it can't possibly be our fault.

  57. What about the severely disabled? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Besides the very obvious argument that the government shouldn't have the right to decide what's best for you, what about people who can't enjoy going outside? Some people are only really alive in virtual reality. This is just another way of crippling them.

    I guess they'll just have to spend more money so they can take up multiple MMORPGs.

    Rhetorical question one: Is the government going to reimburse players for the 11 hours (counting a normal sleep cycle) they have paid for but now cannot use?

    Rhetorical question two: Is the Chinese government's solution to taking this away from those who cannot enjoy the outside to abandon those children as infants next time?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:What about the severely disabled? by poticlin · · Score: 1

      Some people are only really alive in virtual reality. This is just another way of crippling them.
      Is it not crippling them to make them beleive they are really alive in the virtual reality?
    2. Re:What about the severely disabled? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Is it not crippling them to make them beleive they are really alive in the virtual reality?

      As opposed to never feeling alive?

      Some people with debilitating injuries manage to live a happy life out in the Real World (tm). Some never do. Why should they be unhappy? Or should they just be killing themselves since they don't fit in?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  58. Re:Read the article.. not the summary- no time lim by MeanderingMind · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But the latter image is more humorous! Although it's one of those "I can't believe I'm laughing at something to horrible" cases.

    --
    Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
  59. Come on... by session_start · · Score: 1

    How long until these kids find a way to bypass the system and get all the game-time they want?

  60. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey CogDissident, Don't ever say you are not a racist. Just because you have black friends and dated/dating a black girl it doesn't qualify you for not being racist towards black people or lower class people. How come you did not say anything about "hard core heavy metal" music, huh? Give me a break you are the worse kind of racist. Let me educate you about music. Music is an expression of once thought. I know sometimes rap can get a little out of hand but even with that it is someones expression of what they see (sometimes a little exzagerated). It is simple if you don't like it don't listen to it. BTW, majority of the sales for rap music comes from kids from the suburbs, check your stats. I thought you were educated. Not everyone's life is like yours (white picket fences and a loving family), wake up and see the world. Life is a lot more than your country club life style. If you can't relate to what other types of cultures are into just don't start criticizing them even if the message is not for your taste. It is funny how you are getting quick to criticize the people who listen to rap but you don't have any problem getting some love from a black woman. Ask your friends if they like rap or hip hop? BTW, there is a difference.

  61. Good for them by bconway · · Score: 1

    Parental control > government control > no control.

    In the absence of parents that give a damn, it's nice that someone is telling the kids to do their homework. But then again, I'm a responsible parent that already limits my children's time when they're unable to manage it themselves.

    --
    Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
  62. Comments miss the point by Pakaran2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Saying the big human rights problem with China is their restriction of online gaming is like saying the problem with Bob Jones University is not supporting Linux on the network.

  63. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is informative, it is not a troll. it's the author that matters.

  64. Media Addiction is not censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone want to buy the url AddictedToMedia.com? I don't have $10...and its about to expire before I can do anything with it. (myspace.com/johnlfoster)

  65. You have to be kidding? by Shivetya · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You think that the under 18 crowd is the leetspeek, ninja looters, griefers & beggars group? You obviously haven't met these people in real life. Some of the worse have kids!!!

    Let alone the fact this is the typical selfish reaction from people who only think freedom works when someone else doesn't do something they don't like.

    no, the solution is for you to ignore the people who cause you grief in these games or just don't play them. Most MMORPGs have methods to ignore the very people you speak of. Use it, never suggest to a politician new ways to thwart our rights.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  66. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Thexare+Blademoon · · Score: 0

    if you don't like it don't listen to it.

    While I could joke and say "but then I'd have nothing to complain about!", it's actually not that simple, and I know you know why - people driving down the road playing it so loud you can (and I say this without exaggeration) hear it from fifty feet away inside a vehicle with the windows closed. Even if I don't want to listen to it (and trust me, I don't), I'm still frequently subjected to it.

    So, you still think it's that simple?

  67. Re:Chinese, you are reallyy, really stupid by Lisandro · · Score: 1

    Like the Western world is doing much better. We get shafted by politicians in a daily basis..

  68. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Truer words have never been seen on this forum, brother. I can only wish that the unawakened White people on this site will read your words and see the reality of the world around them. And for anyone reading this and the words above, if this is the first time you've been exposed to the truth, don't feel guilty for agreeing with it. Sometimes the truth is ugly, so ugly that most people quite simply refuse to accept it. That doesn't make it any less real. Open your mind. A good place to start is http://www.stormfront.org./ A positive and nurturing home for White racialists on the net. 14 words.

  69. Sadly, it's not that simple by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sadly, it's not that simple. We all like to pretend that surely only kids do this and that, and grown ups are all responsible and polite and whatnot. Dream on.

    Point in case, I actually know a mid-40's mid-level manager who speaks l33t in MMOs. Shocked the heck out of me to hear (ok, read) him online chatting in what I imagined to be typical loser-kid speak. The poor sap probably imagines that adopting that lingo makes him all cool and hip online.

    I know a guy in his 50's whose online life consists pretty much of being a die-hard ganker. That's how he gets his jollies. Ganking newbies.

    Also, let's just say there must be a reason why the stereotype about all the "horny naked teenage female" characters online is to assume it must be a fat 40-year-old guy, and not, say, that it must be a 14 year old guy. 'Nuff said.

    Conversely, I've been grouped with more than enough 14 year olds and even (according to himself) a 11 year old, that could actually play the game pretty darn well and functioned perfectly well in a group.

    Now I'm not saying that either covers 100% of the group. ("All generalizations are false, including this one.") Just that you can't take it for granted that kids = "leetspeek, ninja looters, griefers & beggars", and adults = cool.

    As for the nanny-state part, actually I hope that it's _not_ possible to bank hours. The chinese have my sympathy, but from a selfish bastard point of view: maybe having to deal with the chinese market will finally hammer it into everyone's head that 40-man 8-hour raids are _not_ fun. If it's not possible to do it in 3 hours, including getting the group, that should be anyone's hint that it's probably not that much fun. If you end up having some sort of _duty_ to the guild to be there daily at hour X, because 39 others depend on you, it's not fun. Time sinks are ok only when done in moderation, not when you need to quit your job or give up sleep to even be able to join.

    Again, I'm aware that it's a very selfish and nasty thing to say, cheering at someone else's problems. So don't take it too seriously. But, still, if it's happening anyway, it might as well give some designers some clue.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Sadly, it's not that simple by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      I agree with your analysis, and as an added bonus offer this Penny-Arcade strip.

  70. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Real_Reddox · · Score: 0
    Actually, according to the exremely accurate web encyclopedia uncyclopedia.org:

    Rap is a genre of music that is centered around the essential musical concepts of syncopated rhythm and gettin' jiggy wit da ladieez and shit. Once the exclusive preserve of the Vienna Concert House, rap is now just beginning to be understood and accepted by the vast majority of wealthy skinny white kids in suburban bedrooms who spend hours poring over the "beautiful poetry" of rap by candlelight. See for yourself
    --
    I spent five minutes stealing cool sigs and all I got was this.
  71. grr... no subject by Raynor · · Score: 1

    "Users will have to register with their real names and Chinese identity card numbers to be allowed access to the games."

    So the next time some kid starts talkin' smack we can track them down, call them collect and give them a piece of our mind.

    "Collect Call from: The Chinese Government, pick up or be disconnected."

    --
    "Dictator Flakes. They WILL be delicious."
  72. Inintended consequences... by krbvroc1 · · Score: 1

    I predict it will backfire. Under-18 players rather than grinding away in the online game for say a 5 hour stint, will instead only play for 3 hours. Lots of software utilities will be written to monitor/maximize this time. The remaining 2 hours will still be online, but since it is not rewarded fully, people will just hang out 'chatting'. The chatting will allow for MORE 'political dissident' speak than without the law. Hence, unintended consequences.

  73. Thanks for the new tagline... by krick-zero · · Score: 1

    It's impossible to post this without a bunch of text up front to get past the slashdot "lameness filter".... IM IN UR CHINA NERFING UR GOLD FARMING

  74. Other "Features"? by FuryG3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder what other features this software has. Are these Game-Houses typically internet cafes? If so are these computers also used for web browsing?

    Sure sure, I know China's already got the tap on these places. The sites these users visit (that aren't blocked), are probably logged for easy reviewing access. But it sure would be nice to tie browsing (and game-playing) history to one person, regardless as to what computer he sits at or cafe's he visits.

    Monitoring in-game chat would also be a "nice" feature.

    -Derek

  75. Is this a futurecast? He's still alive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's not dead and he was born in 1940.

    Maybe you meant some other Don Imus.

    We all know Slashdotters are technically advanced, so maybe you really are from the future. Or not.

  76. 116 males to 100 females in China by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

    You would think that in places like China and India, the government would not disrupt activities which are surefire methods of decreasing reproduction rates.

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  77. Good news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I can only get my ass handed to me by the same (Chinese) guy 3 hours a day. Hurray for the Chinese government!!!

    Now if the South Koreans would ban their kids to like 20 min, I might be able to get some loot.

  78. yeah, yeah, sure! by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Tell me more about how I need self-control. How I can choose not to play WoW 7 hours a day... because I just want to check out on my auction status of that dagger... This is comming from someone who has tried smoking many times and every time was able to just stop... without wanting to smoke. No, I didn't quit smoking many times -- didn't need to "quit" -- just stopped. Everyone has their addiction. Just because you can't appreciate how some people can be addicted to that which you can try for a while and quickly get bored of doesn't mean that their addiction is not real. Yes, really! No, I am not being sarcastic. If you haven't discovered your adiction yet, then consider yourself lucky. If anything, the shock of most of the people on this site is indicative of how adaptable the government of China is being to the changing world... I'd say that says something about the state of our own beuaracracy in the US.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  79. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

    I agree. If you listen to rap (and not just the pop stuff), you'll see it really is a reflection of an environment that the rappers grew up in. Seeing drugs and other crime every day while growing up has to have a negative impact on kids. You see people complain about violent video games all the time, what about kids growing up in a violent life? They often have only a single parent so they end up with very little supervision. Money is hard to come by so they gravitate to making it anyway they can...selling drugs is a popular choice, and a few make it in rap or sports. I don't see rap as perpetuating this problem, but reflecting it.

  80. Parent should have final decision by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    I see nothing really wrong with requiring such a feature be *available*, but it should be up to parents to decide wether to switch it on or not. And further, how do they know who is playing?

  81. Communism = No gaming 4 U by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a way I have to appreciate their form of government. If they know something is bad - negative - whatever, they can just make a law. No protesting by the people who just like to protest etc. But on the other hand this law could have been something even more overbearing and you would be powerless to do anything except get on your knees and say thank you great leader. Kinda scary!

  82. not a good solution by imkow · · Score: 1

    now kids have more chances playing standalone/single games and watching american porn instead.

    --
    China, in fact, is very fragile.
  83. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by partenon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Dude, I read everything you wrote. I have only three words to say: you are sick.

    --
    ilex paraguariensis for all
  84. Sigh -- Americans will never "get" China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe it's because your view of Asia is so Japan-centric. You would like nothing better than for all Asian nations to be a puppet state of the US. However, the US is in very real danger of making the same mistake in Asia as they did in the Middle East -- namely, associating yourselves with the one country in the region that has a recent history of imperialist invasions against virtually all of its neighbors. If you like that sort of thing, by all means, keep pretending that China doesn't have reasons behind its motivations. Keep pretending that having an ally in Japan and maintaining minefields in Korea puts the US squarely on the good side of Asians.

    For those of you who actually want to stop to consider why things are the way they are, and why China continues to grow in popularity while the US digs itself further into its own hole in the global arena, today's history lesson is the so-called Opium Wars. Look it up on Wikipedia. The Opium Wars were initiated by Britain because they didn't like their trade deficit with China. DOES THAT SOUND AT ALL FAMILIAR? That war nearly cost China its sovereignty, and they would be stupid to allow a videogame to do the same thing today. The Chinese are addiction-prone, and this isn't just a recent issue with MMOs, it goes all the way back to Mahjong (huge numbers of Chinese were/are gambling addicts). The government realizes that this is a problem both for the individuals affected and the nation as a whole, and they are doing something about it. Westerners may consider compulsory limits on videogames to be too restrictive; but given the choice between limits on videogames (for children) or having a foreign army walking your streets uncontested, it seems like a pretty small price to pay, doesn't it? Most nations have compulsory (even if conditional) military service. Americans call it the draft. This is something the government forces you to do when a war breaks out. The Chinese version is to avoid war by limiting the amount of addictive influence that foreign entities can have on its populace. So take your pick -- join the army or limit your MMO time. Does China's actions seem more reasonable now? Perhaps even... humane, considering the very real alternatives that still linger in the collective memory of the Chinese?

    Again, the Chinese are applying lessons learned from history. Their history. Not the whitewashed history that you want them to learn from. Americans in their eternal arrogance think this is just about Western ideals of personal freedom vs the Chinese government's repressive regime. You people obviously don't know the history of the nation well enough to understand its motivations, so please stop passing judgment as if it has any comparison to western politics.

  85. China by Boardguy56 · · Score: 1

    I think that its a good idea for the youth to be limited for the number of hours of online gaming. There is more out there than just gaming. 4 hours is a damn long time to be playing a game thats 1/6 of the day. Dont jump on me about this but its important for children to get outside and play not just live in front of the computer. I think its a good step.

  86. ... Limits Kids to 3hrs of Online Gambling by Gizah · · Score: 1

    Oh, did I misread that?

  87. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree . I also know what its like to be hungry, alone and looking to get out anyway I can. What I don't agree with however is the method. Drug dealing and theft are not the only options, they are the EASIEST options. Any asshole can steal and sell drugs. Whats hard is going to school earning your education and busting your ass to get OUT of the ghetto. You don't have to be a criminal to get ahead you do however have to do something to move yourself forward. The sad thing is that the music ( not all, I am for REAL hip-hop ) glamorizes the world of theft, gang-life, thug-life, and drug dealing. Helping Make the young into the next generation of thugs and prisoners. I know the parents aren't all to blame but Ill tell you one thing.... the occasional ass-whooping for not doing my homework helped me get where I am today... and all parents have time to do that.

  88. out of the box thinking by samsamsamj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do you have to resort to the deep rooted stereotype whenever talking about anything you don't really know or understand? I'm so tired of the typical rants here about China that I actually spend the time register and say something different.

    Fact: China has a long way to go in comparison to most western countries on banning things, esp in the minor protection department. Think of all the hassles you've got to go through to buy alcohol, or to go to a movie and left the kids home. Think of all those regulations you've got to study to do anything kid related, be it starting a day care or get licensed as a school teacher.

    Fact: The communist party in China is neither more evil nor more foolish than the party you vote for or vote against. The so-called "China style communism" is neither more repressive nor more rigid than the church doctrine you believe or disbelieve. Tell you what, when I first came to the US, my first ever and the only bible study (hard sold to me by a co-worker) reminded me dearly of the culture revolution style meeting my parents described to me. We Chinese don't do that sort of things anymore, ever since I was born. But it's still alive and kicking here. Talking about the brain wash, ha.

    Fact: Most Chinese don't really care about the democracy or freedom of speech you cherish so much, at least for now. We certainly don't want the freedom to defend ourselves by owning a rifle. If you really want to export your ideology I'd say prepare for the culture shock. The last time a friend of mine (born a US citizen) tried to convince me the Taiwan style democracy is good for China I told him the popular saying in China, which is even quoted by Taiwan's vice president as well as opposition party leader as true, "if you haven't been to Taiwan, you won't realize the culture revolution is still on-going".

    Fact: The shear fact that you're having a hard time believing these is the proof of how your democracy and freedom of speech has failed to provide you with a clear view on what's going on in the world. Think harder, and think out of the box, then maybe someday you'll make sense of the things happening across the ocean.

  89. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

    I agree, and will do you one better and put nearly all the blame on the parents. My parents weren't rich and didn't have much education, but from a young age they pounded into me that education == better life. That plus a few ass whoopings when needed eventually got me to college.

  90. Noooooo!!! by servertary · · Score: 1

    The Chinese Government MUST reconsider their recent actions to limit online gaming! I was hoping to actually be able to enjoy the great outdoors once the rest of you were completely addicted... This sucks.

  91. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    your ass sore cause mine kinda is. Case study complete. Parental ass whoopings lead to higher graduation rates.

  92. Re:Read the article.. not the summary- no time lim by grumpyman · · Score: 1

    This is another typical slashdotter itchy/scratchy article. For ANY China related article, say "Wenjiabao farted", these grunts will find a way to related the 'news' to 'human rights record', 'iron fist state-control'...etc.

  93. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    racist towards black people or lower class people.
    You missed off women. Women are a race too* You think it's OK if he's racist towards women? Actually, you probably do. They're just ho's, right?

    Music is an expression of once thought... a little exzagerated ... majority of the sales for rap music comes ... I thought you were educated.
    Sorry I can't reciprocate. You clearly aren't.

    Ask your friends if they like rap or hip hop? BTW, there is a difference.
    Yeah, one's shit and the other's crap.

    Dumb kaffer.

    (Posted AC to avoid having spears thrown at me)

    * well if poor people are, then why not?

  94. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great work, you nigger loving karma whore!

  95. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by cyphercell · · Score: 1

    "pounded into me that education == better life" That's all my mom ever did, she didn't beat me, she just didn't shut up, never ever gave up.

    --
    Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
  96. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by operagost · · Score: 2, Informative

    Take away the racist words and it's mostly insightful.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  97. Adaware? Are you kidding. by MMInterface · · Score: 1

    I'm throwing poop bricks at them not because they put adaware on there but becuase they had the audacity to give such a lame reason for it. After that I looked at their page noticed how much white space there was. It was rediculous. If those ads were visible I wouldn't have bothered reading the article. That list is one big joke.

  98. No fucking shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm glad that someone else has noticed this.

    Slashdot articles on China are ALWAYS negative.

    It wouldn't surprise me one bit to learn that CmdrTaco and his has-been wanker buddies look down upon Chinese people.

  99. Re:Read the article.. not the summary- no time lim by fabs64 · · Score: 1

    Lucky they have you to tell them what's best for them then.

  100. obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> I think the distinction between "government" and "family" is actually a little artificial

    >I think this is one of the most wrong things I've ever read.

    wrong!?? this is SPARTA!!!!

  101. China by Boardguy56 · · Score: 1

    I think that it's a good idea for the youth to be limited for the number of hours of online gaming. There is more out there than just gaming. 4 hours is a damn long time to be playing a game that's 1/6 of the day. Don't jump on me about this but its important for children to get outside and play not just live in front of the computer. I think it's a good step.

  102. Re: Chinese Govt Limits Kids to 3hrs of Online Gam by rabautdo · · Score: 1

    Yesterday April 9, the Chinese government issued a regulation which takes effect on April 15 that demands online operators set up a "game fatigue system." What this does is limit the amount of "productive gameplay" to 3 hours a day. After the limit is exceeded for up to 2 more hours gamers receive half of the normal points, and after 5 hours they receive no points. The reason for this anti-addiction software is to deter gamers from playing games so long that they damage their bodies. However, limiting gamers to the amount of time they can play a game they bought sounds like an invasion of privacy to me. Also it seems kind of forceful to require online gaming cites to integrate software into their games. And even more of an invasion, why should gamers have to register using real names and identity card numbers to indicate if they are younger than 18? This anti-addictive gaming software seems as though it violates many rights of Chinese citizens.

  103. Where To Draw The Line? by raumshan · · Score: 1

    O.k this is completely ridiculous. I understand that sitting at a computer or gaming system for hours on end does not promote a healthy lifestyle for kids but it is really up to the parents to monitor that and NOT THE GOVERNMENT. If the government takes it upon itself to monitor the time spent gaming in each household, what else will it soon "take an interest in"?? TV watching? Reading? Other more personal activities? Because sitting down reading a novel lacks about as much activity as playing a video game. I would hate to have a government official knocking at my door the minute I've gone over my 3 hour reading limit and am just getting to the juicy plot of the novel! My opinion is that the government should stay out of the recreational lives of it's citizens.

  104. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by FamineMonk · · Score: 1

    You sir are an asshole.
    Crime and poverty are not whats wrong with this country, you are.

  105. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by bhiestand · · Score: 1

    I'm not racist, just pointing out that the entire culture is a self perpetuating cycle of self-inflicted poverty and crime. Umm... that's the point. That's actually why we sell them gangster rap. Well that and the fact that it's profitable. But it's a great tool for keeping the black man down. Can you imagine what this country would be like if black children strived to be the president instead of being hard? Hell, we'd have black presidents! I don't know how Obama got through the cracks, but we can't let him win!

    Quite seriously, it's amazing how often people jump to call you racist when you simply mention that there may be differences in culture and sub-culture between non-white ethnicities in America. You can joke about the Irish drinking too much, the Germans being Nazis, the French being pussies, and the Spanish/Latins trying to be macho, but if you even mention that the gangster rap subculture has a negative effect on society and its members, you're a racist. Hell, there are people who won't even talk to me anymore because they heard me say that I felt affirmative action was an insult to minorities! I'd be livid if somebody told me I needed a lower GPA and SAT scores to get into a college because less was expected of my race.

    Slightly back on topic, I did notice when I was in Korea that people there play games much longer in cyber cafes and watch StarCraft tournaments on TV. If China has a similar problem with people dying because they tried to play 70 hours straight, perhaps this isn't such a bad idea.
    --
    SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
  106. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by bhiestand · · Score: 1

    I wasn't going to apply, because you're obviously either an idiot or troll, but I'll do so because other people reading this might actually think you have a point.

    Funny, you're obviously the racist one here. You assume that because he's white he grew up in a wealthy or middle class family with a house and a white picket fence? I'm not sure why you think he said "only black people listen to rap", but he didn't. Rap glorifies crime, poverty, and violence. Yes, it reflects the problems facing many lower class families. No, it's not positive. The song was "Smack my Bitch Up", not "I'm so Poor but I Really Want to get a Good Job."

    Cultures that glorify crime, particularly theft, assault, murder, and drug use are going to lead to a certain percentage of that population wanting to follow that path instead of working their way out of that situation in a positive manner. Some of them are going to follow this lifestyle and become good rappers in the process. They will get wealthy and continue to spread The Word about the great life. This is why it is self-perpetuating. In addition, the majority of people who attempt to follow this path will be in and out of prison most of their lives simply because they made the wrong choices. Choices that were influenced by this sub-culture in addition to their financial status. Many of them could have improved their lives instead of ruining their lives. This is what's called self-inflicted poverty and crime.

    I dislike the majority of rap and I am rarely forced to listen to it, but I will continue to speak out about the negative impact of this culture because it really does end up hurting people and our economy as a whole.

    Personally, I'd rather have all of those impoverished people make more money so that I can make more money off them, bulldoze the low-income housing and develop it into something more profitable. I feel that this will never happen unless the predominantly black and hispanic sub-culture in America realizes that their priorities should be on self-improvement and advancement in society, and it makes me sad that they still haven't. Of course every time I say that I wish they were better off, but they won't be until their culture changes, someone calls me a racist. This is not about race. This is about a sub-culture and income bracket that is predominately black and hispanic.

    And yes, even a song to the tune of Mary Had a Little Lamb can have a negative effect on society if its message is the glorification of drugs, crime, and imprisonment. This is about the rap sub-culture, not necessarily all rap music.

    --
    SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
  107. Re:Sad News, Don Imus dead at 83 by bhiestand · · Score: 1

    Crikey. Please read "apply" as "reply". Thank you.

    --
    SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
  108. Re:Guns don't kill people, niggers kill people. by partenon · · Score: 1

    I didn't say it isn't insightful. I said he is sick. Just like most crazy people, he was very sane in some statements, but completely insane in others.

    --
    ilex paraguariensis for all
  109. re: MMORPG addiction by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    I don't see anything naive about realizing that the bottom line is, it's an issue you have to take upon yourself to solve. Like most addictions, you won't truly get over it until a lot of bad things happen in your life as a result of it. (And I fail to see how it should be any other way, really? If your intense interest/obsession with something isn't interfering with the rest of your life in a significant manner, it's questionable to label it a true "addiction" that needs "treatment". Many of the world's most difficult problems are only solved by people with that type of focus and drive.)

    We tend to create groups (like Alanon or the "Bets Off" type groups to stop compulsive gambling) only for problems that have no apparent "good side" to them. (Show me anyone who can say their alcohol addiction provided a number of benefits in their life, despite the damage to their health, the loss of their job, and so on.)

    Other "addictions" like getting hooked on multi-player online games may provide several benefits to the player that aren't immediately apparent to people not participating in the games. Perhaps they allow a handicapped person to communicate with the "rest of the world" more easily through online chatting? Perhaps it allows teens to make online friends with people of other cultures, from all over the world, who they'd never have reason to start a conversation with otherwise? They're certainly not *physically* addicting like cigarettes or other drugs can be.

    I daresay that rather than relying on some "support group" for help in these cases, individuals need to take control of their own lives. It's a shame that it could mean breaking up a marriage over it, but if that's what it takes to force a person to step back and see the "bigger picture" of what their life is all about, I think that's the only true "solution".