Slashdot Mirror


Chinese "Web Addicts" Get Boot Camp, Therapy

itwbennett writes "A large number of Chinese parents are finding their teenagers to be exhibiting such psychological symptoms as depression, antisocial behavior, and slipping grades. The cause: Internet addiction. World of Warcraft and Counter-Strike rank beside Chinese role-playing games as those that hook the most patients, says Tao Ran, the founder of a youth rehabilitation center on a Beijing army base. Online chat programs more often hook girls, who make up a handful of Tao's current 70 patients. The teens are subjected to a 'strict regimen of military drills, martial arts training, lectures and sessions with psychiatrists.' And, most importantly: no Internet."

279 comments

  1. Your Rights Online by S7urm · · Score: 1

    I would think of this as more of a "News" Article than anything else

    --
    "This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
    1. Re:Your Rights Online by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...Except for the fact that I consider it a right to use what you payed for so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. This "boot camp" takes away those rights (anyone else find it just a bit suspicious that its located on an army base?).

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Your Rights Online by brkello · · Score: 5, Informative

      Kids probably aren't paying for the Internet connection and they do not have the rights of an adult. The addiction is hurting their intellectual and social progress. Is that their choice? Not while they are dependents.

      Americans send their fat kids to boot camp. I really wouldn't be suspicious.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    3. Re:Your Rights Online by Slashdot+Suxxors · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Dude, it's China.

    4. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The idea that "fat camp" is any more acceptable than this crap is deplorable.

    5. Re:Your Rights Online by fishbowl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's *China*. When it comes down to it, nobody has any rights, in the sense that Europeans or Americans think of rights.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    6. Re:Your Rights Online by Darkness404 · · Score: 1, Troll
      This is China though. Who is to say that the parents are really sending their kids there or is it the government prodding the parents to send their kids there?

      The addiction is hurting their intellectual and social progress. Is that their choice? Not while they are dependents.

      How? I'd imagine that a ton more people are more severely addicted to TV, sports, books and activities considered "normal" than are "addicted" to MMOs. I'd imagine the guy who spends 6 hours a day playing WoW is better off then the guy who goes to the gym for 6 hours a day. As for social progress, its a lot more social to fire up a game of WoW and chat than it is to go to the gym. And intellectual? With WoW you are constantly reading and writing and doing math.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    7. Re:Your Rights Online by DrLang21 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except for the fact that it's the parents that are sending their kids to this place. Believe it or not, parents actually have an over riding authority on what their kids will and will not do even in the US.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    8. Re:Your Rights Online by DrLang21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Aside from the fact that the parents are almost always to blame in cases of child obesity, what exactly is wrong with "fat camp"? Quite honestly, morbid child obesity without a clear medical explanation should be grounds for child abuse.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    9. Re:Your Rights Online by CorporateSuit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How? I'd imagine that a ton more people are more severely addicted to TV, sports, books and activities considered "normal" than are "addicted" to MMOs. I'd imagine the guy who spends 6 hours a day playing WoW is better off then the guy who goes to the gym for 6 hours a day. As for social progress, its a lot more social to fire up a game of WoW and chat than it is to go to the gym. And intellectual? With WoW you are constantly reading and writing and doing math.

      Spending 6 hours a day doing something does not make it an addiction. Suffering from depression because you aren't spending 6 hours a day doing something makes it an addiction (outside of sleeping and autonomous functions). Addiction will cause everything directly not linked to that addiction to suffer as a result of it to one degree or another. Spending time talking to people in Azeroth is not as socially healthy as talking to people face to face. It's healthier than spending time in front of a tv or book. As a freetime activity, it's healthier than many things unless you let it become detrimental to your real non-make-believe life. It's not a problem when an activity is a healthy relief of pressure and stress... It's a problem when it's an addiction, then you may need help to return it to normal, healthy levels.

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    10. Re:Your Rights Online by Swizec · · Score: 1

      ...Except for the fact that I consider it a right to use what you payed for so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. This "boot camp" takes away those rights (anyone else find it just a bit suspicious that its located on an army base?).

      By that analogy we shouldn't be treating heroin addicts either.

    11. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is China though. Who is to say...

      You, I'm sure. When you talk about China, I trust that you draw upon your vast amount of personal experience while shunning preconceived notions, stereotypes and heresay.

    12. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... morbid child obesity without a clear medical explanation should be grounds for child abuse.

      I mean, I am all for fighting obesity in all ways possible, but it just doesn't seem right to beat children or otherwise abuse them simply because they are overweight.

    13. Re:Your Rights Online by Darkness404 · · Score: 1, Troll

      Spending 6 hours a day doing something does not make it an addiction. Suffering from depression because you aren't spending 6 hours a day doing something makes it an addiction (outside of sleeping and autonomous functions)

      ...So someone really likes something. I know a lot of people who suffer from depression from something that they weren't exactly addicted to. Is someone addicted to their job if they get depressed if they get laid off? Is someone addicted to their wife/husband if they get depressed after they get divorced, move away or die? By your definition the average person is addicted to a bunch of stuff.

      Spending time talking to people in Azeroth is not as socially healthy as talking to people face to face.

      How many people can actually though on a daily basis talk to a good amount of friends face to face? Very few. There are a good deal of friends who either have strange schedules where we can't really meet (like one has a job a night so he has off when I'm working and when I'm done with work he is at work) so we use e-mail/social networking to communicate. Others simply live too far away to see on a regular basis. Aside from students who see a bunch of people they can really be friends with on a daily basis, most people have very few friends they can really meet face to face and so they communicate either via e-mail, texting or phone calls. Or is it just "unhealthy" to talk to people you haven't physically met?

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    14. Re:Your Rights Online by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      This is China though. Who is to say...

      You, I'm sure. When you talk about China, I trust that you draw upon your vast amount of personal experience while shunning preconceived notions, stereotypes and heresay.

      I see. So, in other words, you're claiming that China is not a totalitarian state?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    15. Re:Your Rights Online by Randall311 · · Score: 1

      Addiction will cause everything directly not linked to that addiction to suffer as a result of it to one degree or another.

      What you say?

    16. Re:Your Rights Online by kzieli · · Score: 1
      As a parent I don't find this alarming in the slightest. If one of my sons developed an Addiction that I could not help him with I would also seek eternal help. And if the recomended course of action was to send him to such a program Then I would follow it.

      One problem with the approach however is that the addict is taken out of their normal environment can lead to a sense of false progress. Often when someone comes back to their old environment, hangs out with friends who practically live online etc, environmental ques will bring back the old behavior.

      This is a common thing seen with drug addiction. Its easy for a user to stay clean while they are in jail. But chances are that once they get out they'll go back to using.

      Their seem two factors which contribute to the news value of this:

      1. Its in China so it must have sinister ulterior motives (which I don't buy)
      2. As heavy computer users we would all like to pretend that internet addition isn't possible.

      I don't agree with either of the above. Personally I find American Jesus Camps http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Camp much more alarming.

      --
      read my mind at http://the-willows.blogspot.com/
    17. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd imagine the guy who spends 6 hours a day playing WoW is better off then the guy who goes to the gym for 6 hours a day.

      I also hear that drinking Coca-Cola is a lot better than drinking water.

      As for social progress, its a lot more social to fire up a game of WoW and chat than it is to go to the gym.

      You might end up talking to someone at the gym, and at the very least you're among people. When you're playing WoW you're all by yourself. Contrary to what some nerds tell themselves, chatting online does nothing to improve your social skills.

      And intellectual? With WoW you are constantly reading and writing and doing math.

      I can't remember ever doing any math in WoW, and the reading was mostly limited to finding out what I need to kill next.

      You did not explain how WoW keeps you in shape and improves your physical health (oh, wait, it doesn't!).

      World of Warcraft is not productive or useful, and not a substitute for social interaction, intellectual stimulation and excercise.

    18. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see. So, in other words, you're claiming that China is not a totalitarian state?

      That is correct, but has no bearing on Internet boot camp. China isn't forcing anyone to be in these camps.

    19. Re:Your Rights Online by wintermute000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Addicted to gym is worse than addicted to WoW?

      Now I've heard it all.

      Every time I read about someone proclaiming the virtues of WoW and how it teaches reading, writing, math etc. I just have to laugh and wonder whether the OP is just trying to justify their own pathetic (yes, I think WoW addicts are pathetic) addictions

    20. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      You sound fat.

    21. Re:Your Rights Online by CorporateSuit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With your first point, you're setting up strawmen. Depression from loss or trauma is not the same as withdrawal symptoms. I used the line to make a very limited, simple point. There's no argument in stretching it beyond the point it was meant to make. I didn't feel it neccessary to write an 60,000 word essay on the differences between hobby and addiction.

      With your second paragraph, you're skirting the issue. Is it a better social experience to speak with a friend face to face or online? It's healthier to talk to a person than to talk to words on a screen. Allow me to make an analogy of this conversation if we were discussing food:
      Me: It's healthier to eat vegetables than junk food. It's ok to eat junk food as long as it's not interfering with the rest of your diet.
      You: What if junk food is all you have? Not everyone has vegetables available.

      It is simplified, but contains the neccessary arguments. I believe you are capable of answering your own questions at this point, even if they were meant to be rhetorical (I won't assume whether they were or were not).

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    22. Re:Your Rights Online by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      AC, you're absolutely delusional if you think China is not a totalitarian state. In fact, I'm willing to bet you know it is, but instead like f-ing with us just to get a reaction. So ya, I guess I am giving you the benefit of the doubt.

      Scary. I'm actually being nice for once today. Not that *you* deserve it!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    23. Re:Your Rights Online by plasticsquirrel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's because "rights" are an idea from western civilization, and most other cultures had different notions about justice and social harmony. Considering that over 40 million Chinese died during the "Great Leap Forward," and countless more before that in previous wars and revolutions, we don't have the same perspective on stability that they do. The coastal city of Ningbo, for example, was bombed with the bubonic plague by the Japanese during World War II. The amount of violence and upheaval that the Chinese have faced in the last hundred years is incredible, and sometimes I think that we Slashdotters would do well to relax and give them some time to sort things out (it is their own country, after all). They have a 5000 year old civilization, after all, and things aren't going to implode because pimply-faced teenage kids have to do martial arts rather than play World of Warcraft.

      --
      Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
    24. Re:Your Rights Online by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Come on, this is China. Only the ruling elite have rights. Everyone else is so much chattel.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    25. Re:Your Rights Online by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Try telling that to the judge when he busts you for smoking a joint. This isn't so bad in comparison to the War on Drug Users.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    26. Re:Your Rights Online by russotto · · Score: 1

      This is a common thing seen with drug addiction. Its easy for a user to stay clean while they are in jail. But chances are that once they get out they'll go back to using.

      Maybe it isn't an addiction at that point. The withdrawal symptoms are over, the physical dependence is demonstrably absent. Maybe it's just something they fucking LIKE DOING. Whatever it is, whether drugs or eating or gambling or indeed the Internet. Just because a bunch of bluenoses have managed to demonize the activity by claiming it's an addiction doesn't mean it really is.

      (Contrast smoking, which it is decidedly NOT easy for a user to stay clean while in jail, even in jails where smoking is forbidden. Now THAT is an addiction)

    27. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, this is China. Only the ruling elite have rights. Everyone else is so much chattel.

      As if it were different anywhere else in the world.

    28. Re:Your Rights Online by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Rights are an important part of humanity. Depriving people of that deprives them of their humanity. If we can't judge the Chinese government for depriving citizens of rights, then thats no different then allowing waterboarding in the US (its part of our culture) or cannibalism (theres nothing wrong with cannibalism, its part of their culture).

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    29. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a common thing seen with drug addiction. Its easy for a user to stay clean while they are in jail. But chances are that once they get out they'll go back to using.

      Not even slightly accurate. Where on earth did you get this idea?

      Number one, there's a substantial traffic in drugs going on inside the jail walls, meaning the users (many of whom were sent there for drug offences in the first place) have no shortage of dangerous crud to smoke, shoot or snort. It's not as if the walls that surround them completely cut them off, not while there is corruption to be exploited.

      Partly as a consequence of this, more addicts leave the prison system than enter it - sticking somebody in jail for a non-drug related offence alongside a bunch of former addicts and dealers is a good way to give said dealers a new customer. People get depressed, there's narcotics to be had, they solve the former problem with the latter.

      Number two, an addict has to want to get clean. Sticking them in jail does not accomplish this - at best they want out. Put someone who does drugs in a confined environment with other people who also do drugs, no women, and very little to do... does this sound like a working strategy?

    30. Re:Your Rights Online by rothic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...sometimes I think that we Slashdotters would do well to relax and give them some time to sort things out...

      The Chinese are going to "sort things out" whether Slashdotters relax, don't relax or even throw a massively coordinated e-tantrum. Slashdot isn't actually really all that influential as it turns out.

    31. Re:Your Rights Online by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      In the end, no. If the heroin addict really wants to be treated let them, if not, they continue to buy heroin and keep pumping money into the economy and the world continues.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    32. Re:Your Rights Online by twostix · · Score: 1

      We're talking about China here, not the US.

      The same China that's just arrested an Australian citizen - the head of Rio Tintos (a massive Aussie mining company) Shanghai operations on "economic espionage" charges conveniently two weeks after Rio Tinto severely embarrassed China by abruptly walking away from their negotiations where the Chinese government via Chinalco was hoping to buy a large stake in the company.

      You "wouldn't be suspicious" because you have no measure to understand the level of totalitarian control the Chinese government exerts.

      The whole world does not operate like the USA, England, Australia or Germany - as Rio Tinto have just found out.

      Twenty years ago it would have been understood that these kids were being sent to be "re-educated" and people in the west would have spat on the ground at the Chinese governments tyranny. Now people in the west, such as yourself, give them the benefit of the doubt.

      The Chinese government hasn't changed in that time, but a hell of a lot of westerners attitudes towards their methods have.

    33. Re:Your Rights Online by Groggnrath · · Score: 5, Funny

      I mean, I am all for fighting obesity in all ways possible, but it just doesn't seem right to beat children or otherwise abuse them simply because they are overweight.

      Not to mention it isn't very fair. It's not like they can run from you. Or if they can, it's not like they can run far.

    34. Re:Your Rights Online by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2

      That's because "rights" are an idea from western civilization, and most other cultures had different notions about justice and social harmony.

      http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ By the way, what exactly are you talking about? Chinese have had a turbulent history, so what? We shouldn't be critical of the current Chinese government because 40 million have died at the hands of its predecessor with whom (on paper at least) it shares the same ideology? I don't understand what your point is.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    35. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible · · Score: 0, Troll

      Jesus fucking Christ on a fucking pogo stick, I'm a troll for explaining that World of Warcraft is a video game and not a substitute for real life? What the fuck.

    36. Re:Your Rights Online by WaXHeLL · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      And we shouldn't be critical about our own current US government that has assassinated leaders, orchestrated coups, and has been directly responsible for numerous deaths?

      Please do some reading on the following topics:
      The Shah of Iran
      Manuel Noriega
      Phillipine-American War
      CIA intervention in Chile

      etc, etc, etc

      --
      The troll with karma.
    37. Re:Your Rights Online by Kal+Zekdor · · Score: 1

      I agree with most of your points, except one. For what reason do you believe that face to face communication is "healthier" than transmitted communication? To avoid a separate philosophical debate, for the purposes of this argument I will agree that social interaction is beneficial to the mental well-being of an individual. However, how does the physical presence of person nearby alter one's mental state? Social interaction is a purely mental domain, physicality has no effect. The exchange of ideas with another person, shared experiences and feelings may be psychologically required for a well-adjusted, socially acceptable person, but how does physical nearness change this?

      As a first example, let us consider video chat. In such a situation, you can see and hear another person, and they can see and hear you. How, in any way, does this differ from standing next to the person in question? How can you deny that this is full social interaction?

      Let us now scale it back slightly. Consider voice chat, telephone calls. Yes, you cannot see the other person, but we are verbal creatures. We have evolved language over many thousands of years, in order to express our thoughts and our selves. Unless you consider standing near a person without any communication a form of meaningful social interaction, you must agree that speech is the core of all social and psychological predispositions to interaction. In such a case, taking away visual stimuli will only remove gesticulation as a form of communication, a form which I contend has no further psychological value. If you would consider a blind man, with no access to these effects, you should see that lack of sight does in no way preclude the ability for social stability.

      Finally, one step further back. Let us now consider text only interaction. To begin, do you deny the power of the written word? It's ability to evoke any emotion that we may feel? Even reading this very discourse, you must have had an emotional response, whether you agree or not. Do you consider a movie more evoking than a book? Even if so, how does the content of the message change according to the means of it's transmission? Do you believe that the actual physical process of hearing sound is handled differently by the psyche? In my own experience, I recall more vividly the words and thoughts conveyed, rather than the actual sounds. I contend that, apart from music, sound does not provide a distinctiveness to communication that cannot otherwise be conveyed.

      As for the other issues at hand, I would like to illuminate that there are two distinct types of addiction, physical dependencies, and emotional dependencies. Clearly, internet addiction would fall under the category of emotional dependencies. If the dependency becomes debilitating, then it is the duty of the parents to render aid. I can only hope that the effort was given to fully comprehend these children's individual situations and that full determination was used in the conclusion of a debilitating condition. I fear it is only too likely, though, that these parents decided upon mere observation of extended time online that their children needed "help", and did not attempt to fully understand why their children proceeded so. Simply spending six hours a day online does not indicate an addiction, nor does depression if one's favorite pastime is taken away without just cause.

    38. Re:Your Rights Online by maxume · · Score: 1

      Is a story where people are arguing about the appropriateness of something going on in China the correct place for that criticism?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    39. Re:Your Rights Online by thegnu · · Score: 1

      Spending time talking to people in Azeroth is [...] healthier than spending time in front of a [...] book

      seriously?

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
    40. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I gave up EVE one year ago, but I still have extremely strong flashback feelings for the sense of accomplishment or to use another term "work reward" I got from that game. It's like recurring vivid flash-backs of thought or jolts that get into my head when I experience something associative to what I was doing last year. The summer days and my current loneliness make it come back recurrently. It may sound like a joke, but the logical part of my brain does not want to play EVE ever again: It slurped up stacks of my time, dragged me away from any meaningful relationships in real life and replaced them with Skype sessions with people significantly more sad than me. The reason I played was because it gave me a terrific sense of accomplishment. I quit because I realized that was just completely fake. But it was a massive phychological effort to sell everything I had, give the money away and just kill the character. I couldn't even just wipe the character first, I had to give my stuff away to at least get some closure! I would say I was addicted and came very close to being next to useless. But like with real addiction, and maybe this is real, I get echoes of that experience in my head still one year later that I'd really prefer not to have. GET OUT OF MY BRAIN! (Posting anon because I'm really embarrassed about this whole thing).

    41. Re:Your Rights Online by Slashdot+Suxxors · · Score: 1

      Mods really should check the dates on the comments before modding something redundant.

    42. Re:Your Rights Online by plasticsquirrel · · Score: 1

      That's because "rights" are an idea from western civilization, and most other cultures had different notions about justice and social harmony. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ By the way, what exactly are you talking about? Chinese have had a turbulent history, so what? We shouldn't be critical of the current Chinese government because 40 million have died at the hands of its predecessor with whom (on paper at least) it shares the same ideology? I don't understand what your point is.

      Yes, and the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights reflects the western "rights" tradition. You think that just because a document exists in an international peacekeeping organization, that it's really a part of other cultures and accurately reflects their values? If so, that's pretty naive.

      My point is that using "rights" as the benchmark of civilization is necessarily a skewed perspective that does not account for cultural needs and differences.

      I also mentioned the extreme amount of violence in China's recent history to contrast it with our own country's, which has not had any invasions or sustained any real violence on anywhere near the same scale. The average American Slashdotter is likely to have a very different perspective, in which it seems reasonable to view WoW-deprivation as some sort of evil government tyranny.

      Being oblivious to these major historical and cultural differences just feeds into the collective ignorance of everyone here. To me, a real nerd should be smarter than that, and be more informed about history and culture rather than just modern technology.

      --
      Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
    43. Re:Your Rights Online by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      A universal declaration of human rights with no corresponding universal declaration of human responsibilities is SO a *western* thing.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    44. Re:Your Rights Online by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, and the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights reflects the western "rights" tradition. You think that just because a document exists in an international peacekeeping organization, that it's really a part of other cultures and accurately reflects their values? If so, that's pretty naive.

      If China does not stand behind UNHR, it should state clearly what parts of it it disagrees with because they don't "reflect their values". China is a grown up country, it doesn't need you to defend it. But just out of curiosity, which of the enumerated rights in that document you think don't agree with Chinese values? They were drafted in order to be universal, hence the name, and one of the main people involved in drafting them was actually Chinese (P. C. Chang - admittedly from Taiwan but surely representative of Chinese culture and values).

      I also mentioned the extreme amount of violence in China's recent history to contrast it with our own country's, which has not had any invasions or sustained any real violence on anywhere near the same scale. The average American Slashdotter is likely to have a very different perspective, in which it seems reasonable to view WoW-deprivation as some sort of evil government tyranny.

      Oh, well, that I can agree with. I don't think the story in this article is a major example of government tyranny or anything like that. However it's worth remembering that there are plenty of real examples of government tyranny in China and saying that somehow that's ok because it's their culture to not respect the rights of individuals is patronizing as well as untrue. I know plenty of Chinese people here in the US and they seems to have much the same values as I do.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    45. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you don't understand what a universal right is? It means it's a right, not something that's earned. Even some selfish bastard who nobody likes still has rights.

    46. Re:Your Rights Online by brkello · · Score: 1

      How?

      Umm, because their grades are dropping and they are showing anti-social tendencies. Playing WoW and CS 6 hours a day as a kid is going to screw up a lot of opportunities. And I say this as someone who has enjoyed playing WoW and CS a whole bunch. These games do not have a large impact on your intellect no matter how hard you want to believe it. You are much better served spending that time at the gym because 1) it is a social activity since you are going to chat with the others who are hardcore working out with you 2) if you are doing it right, it makes you more healthy 3) the opposite sex find fit people attractive.

      Why does China need more in their military? Are they fighting in any major wars? Our military is trying all kinds of ways to lure children to join the military. And we are actually sending our kids over to fight wars based on made up pretenses. Who really is the more evil military regime?

      China does things differently than us. Some of the things they do are inhumane and wrong. But if you can't acknowledge all the screwed up evil things your own country is doing, then you are just falling for the propaganda. I mean, in the U.S., we have a whole party voting against something that will save a lot of money and people's lives. How sick are we as a country when the insurance companies own all of the Republicans and many of the Democrats? Talk about not giving a shit about your citizens...

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    47. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible+II · · Score: 1

      And sure enough, now I'm a troll for questioning why some dipshit anonymous fucking coward is calling me a troll without providing any evidence.

      And even more surely enough, my karma dropped to bad and I became unable to post, so I made a new account. This is how cowardly, fascist moderators silence people: mod them down until they can't post, and with the added bonus of many people not being able to see their messages because the score is too low.

      Well hey, we can't tolerate people disrespecting World of Warcraft by making the astounding claim that it is a mere video game. People who do nothing but sit in their mom's basement and play WoW and masturbate to Night Elf /dance animations all day long aren't going to put up with that shit, no sir.

    48. Re:Your Rights Online by wintermute000 · · Score: 1

      right, and US/French./UK intelligence operations in 3rd world countries are purely charitable and beneficial, they in no way try to directly manipulate the political situation up to and including arranging COUPS to further the ends of business interests.

      The RIO act is wrong but people in glass houses.....

    49. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a thought. Lay off the f-bombs, don't reply to your posts to complain about the moderation, quit patronizing the people you post to with strawman sarcasm, stop calling the moderators names, and try to post like an adult. You aren't being modded troll because people disagree with you; you're being moderated troll because your posts are such utter garbage. Hell, I moderated somebody upthread "underrated" who made the exact same point as you, but did it civilly.

      It's not "moderator groupthink", it's "promoting civility", by keeping the trolls and flamers below the +1 mark. If someone made the exact opposite point as you, using your own language, then I'd mod them down just as surely.

      And if you really dislike the moderation, then metamoderate. You won't rate the moderation on your own posts, but you will likely get a chance to meta a suppressive moderator as "unfair".

    50. Re:Your Rights Online by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      Who the hell said we shouldn't be critical of the US government? I think it's pretty well established that at least a good portion of slashdot certainly is.

      Being critical of the Chinese government does not preclude being critical of our own as well.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    51. Re:Your Rights Online by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      And we shouldn't be critical about our own current US government that has assassinated leaders, orchestrated coups, and has been directly responsible for numerous deaths?

      Yes. If you're implying there's hypocrisy in criticizing other countries because our own government has done bad things, I'd say I told them not to do it and they did it anyway. What can I do aside from voting and making my voice heard as much as possible? There are too many people who act as if the US has divine right to use force however it wants to bend over my knee and spank the bejeezus out of.

    52. Re:Your Rights Online by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      The economist this week: an iron ore syndicate in china turned down government investment and was subsequently held on charges of selling state secrets (which could mean anything in china). At least in the free world, you can turn down the government's involvement without getting your ass arrested. Hell, we let illegals march around in seattle and demand citizenship so long as they file for a permit. Over there, they'd run them over with tanks.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    53. Re:Your Rights Online by plasticsquirrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You are confusing government policy with human culture. Chinese culture has no native rights tradition (or native communist tradition), and instead focuses on individual consciousness, especially in the native philosophies of Confucianism and Daoism. Even laws are viewed as failures of the government and its people. These traditions view society in terms of the individual, rather than advocating overt methods of government control and social change. Over time, people began accepting western ideas about rights, communism, and other things, but these are in no way Chinese ideas because they are only foreign imports.

      --
      Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
    54. Re:Your Rights Online by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      Spending time talking to people in Azeroth is not as socially healthy as talking to people face to face. It's healthier than spending time in front of a tv or book.

      You need pretty big qualifiers if you are going to make those statements and expect anyone to take you seriously.

    55. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spending time talking to people in Azeroth is not as socially healthy as talking to people face to face.

      It's fine in Outland, though.

    56. Re:Your Rights Online by bogjobber · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We're not talking about different notions of justice and social harmony here. They don't have to have the same government and society as us, but everyone should be guaranteed basic human dignities such as freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, protest, fair trial, petition, etc. I am pretty impressed with the progress China has made in the last 30 years, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve criticism. But plenty of countries have gone through hard times and the ravages of war without turning into totalitarian states.

      Just look at what they are doing in Xinjiang right now. They repress Uiger culture and language, while forbidding Muslims from worshiping freely. The Han ethnic group has been encouraged to migrate in and are given preference for jobs. They are systematically destroying a culture. That is racial and cultural oppression, not "different notions about justice."

      And can we stop with the 5000 year old civilization nonsense? It's not like they've been stable for that whole time period. And only in retrospect can the vast array of civilizations that existed in that area of East Asia over the last 5000 years ago be called Chinese. They've had empires rise and collapse, gained and lost vast swaths of territory, been invaded and conquered multiple times, had entire systems of governments collapse, religions appear, spread, and disappear. They aren't any more or less stable than any other ancient civilization, they just started earlier.

    57. Re:Your Rights Online by fbjon · · Score: 2

      e-tantrum

      This word is the most descriptive I've seen this year. It applies to so much "outrage" strewn across message boards, not just on Slashdot...

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    58. Re:Your Rights Online by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Informative

      it's their culture to not respect the rights of individuals is patronizing as well as untrue.

      Untrue? Thousands of people were evicted without compensation to make space for Olympic venues. And how about Tiananmen Square?

      I know plenty of Chinese people here in the US and they seems to have much the same values as I do.

      Do you think there might be some form of sample bias there?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    59. Re:Your Rights Online by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, most of the time you have the right to remain silent...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    60. Re:Your Rights Online by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Healthier for your social skills, I guess. Certainly not for your orthography.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    61. Re:Your Rights Online by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You're new here, but you should have figured out by now that religion is a sensitive subject, online and off.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    62. Re:Your Rights Online by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Oh c'mon, be fair, we only had about 8 years to get there, but we're making great progress, don't you think?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    63. Re:Your Rights Online by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, parents actually have an over riding authority on what their kids will and will not do even in the US.

      But that's not FAIR!!!!!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    64. Re:Your Rights Online by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      *blink*

      In the US, your parents can toss you into a military boot camp?

      Wow, they must need soldiers even more direly than I thought.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    65. Re:Your Rights Online by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Fallacy "et tu quoque".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    66. Re:Your Rights Online by beowulfcluster · · Score: 1

      Reading the article makes it seem like a fitness boot camp. They're not giving their kids to the military.

    67. Re:Your Rights Online by plastbox · · Score: 1

      I must say, Dr. Impossible, that post actually made me laugh out rather loud!

      Also, I haven't the faintest clue why the parent post got downmodded Troll. You use sarcasm in a way that strokes and pleases my somewhat bitter, "I hate humanity"-type ego greatly.

      Oh, and you make perfectly valid points. WoW is a game. There is no need to get all riled up about it. Sure, I have a level 80 warlock and a couple of other 60+ characters and I play WoW with my girlfriend a few hours a week. Do I claim it improves my social skills? No. Do I claim it improves my health or physical fitness? No. Do I claim it is a productive, useful activity? No.

      And why? Because it doesn't, it won't and it isn't! Playing WoW won't change the world. It's multiplayer entertainment, kinda like the retarded younger brother of inviting a few friends over to watch a movie, play Wii and eat dinner, except we can't normally get an evening like that together as a spur of the moment thing. Log onto WoW though, and there will invariably be at least a couple of friends online ready for some fun.

    68. Re:Your Rights Online by tomjen · · Score: 1

      Actually they have exactly the same rights, but the Chinese government don't respect them.

      Remember rights are not granted to you by the state, and they cannot be taken away.

      --
      Freedom or George Bush
    69. Re:Your Rights Online by plastbox · · Score: 1

      Seriously? People still claim that..? The best english writers in WoW are the chinese gold sellers and that's saying a lot! (Hell, even most properly educated chinese/japanese people write english at a level comparable to that of norwegian grade school kids, and we've been repeatedly ripped by the EU for having a shitty educational system!)

      By the way, why on earth is going to the gym, having a social life and playing WoW mutually exclusive? I do all three in addition to my full-time job, my coding hobby and lazy summer days at the beach.

      And yes, WoW addicts are pathetic! I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I ask a friend if he wants to go bowling or see a movie or just hang out and he replies something like "lol ofc not! It's Wednesday, gotta keep my raid attendance up!" x(

    70. Re:Your Rights Online by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      Universal rights aren't though - they don't exist just because we think they should. They're more like obligations - each time we declare a 'universal right' then we also need to be prepared to fight for them. Otherwise, they're irrelevant.

    71. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's healthier to talk to a person than to talk to words on a screen. Allow me to make an analogy of this conversation if we were discussing food:

      Me: It's healthier to eat vegetables than junk food. It's ok to eat junk food as long as it's not interfering with the rest of your diet.

      Absolutely the worst analogy ever.

      Please explain exactly what is unhealthy about socially interacting with someone through a communication medium as opposed to face to face - and I want the explanation in the same scientific detail as you could give regarding the difference between junk food and health food.

      Interacting with actual people is very important as its required for mental stimulation - but I can achieve mental stimulation by talking with actual people online, or over the telephone.

      Obviously there is more conveyed in a face to face chat which you could regard as a higher quality - but no-one would argue that point - but you need serious proof to actually suggest that is physically/mentally unhealthy.

    72. Re:Your Rights Online by Repossessed · · Score: 1

      Spending 6 hours a day doing something does not make it an addiction. Suffering from depression because you aren't spending 6 hours a day doing something makes it an addiction (outside of sleeping and autonomous functions).

      Wouldn't it also be abnormal as hell if somebody didn't become depressed after being cut off from their social circle for an extended period? Depression seems like a bad indicator compared to say, ditching work to chat online. Even then the person might just be a lazy bum.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    73. Re:Your Rights Online by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      You can learn from games though. OK, so I don't know about WOW, but I've got a fair bit of experience in project planning, economics and management/leadership from playing EVE. I'm not going to say that it's primary value is it's education - I play it because I enjoy it, and find it a more constructive way of spending time than vegetating in front of TV.
      But to dismiss the advantages of a reduced-consequence environment as a learning opportunity is mistaken

    74. Re:Your Rights Online by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      I know well what you mean - I play EVE (ok, so a different MMO) in the 'gaps' where other people watch TV. Very occasionally I'll make a point of trying to get to something game related, but only to a point. (E.g. I might re-arrange when I go to the gym, so I can make an EVE fleet op, and then go to the gym later). It's not mutually exclusive _unless_ you are in fact, addicted to it.
      That's part of why I will give people a hard time for blowing off a social activity in favour of gaming - I've heard housemates declare 'sorry, not tonight, I'm too tired' only to have them still up and playing their current MMO well after I get home and have gone to bed.
      But yes, my online time has dropped since I got a social life and have upped my gym attendance - but I still probably get a good few hours in each week (mmm counting fingers, probably something like 10-20). I don't see that as a problem particularly, provided it doesn't take priority over 'everything else' I should be doing.

    75. Re:Your Rights Online by Wizard+Drongo · · Score: 1

      The fascists, the communists, the oppressors; these people are on the wrong side of history. They will learn, as the leaders in Iran are learning, that you cannot keep information from your populace any more. The internet's biggest contribution to humanity could well be the end of tyranny.
      If these leaders were smart, they would have never let the net in. But now, the cat is out of the bag; these countries need the internet for their economies, and their people want the internet so much they do not dare take it away lest the people revolt.
      But it is merely a stay of execution. As we see ever more information available at the tap of a key to even the most remote and backward of places, casual violence, tyranny, oppression and torture will no longer be tolerated apathetically by the masses. I give the communists in China 25 more years at more. Before that's up, they'll either have moderated themselves to the point of elections and thus been voted out or there will be another revolution, hopefully with someone nice at the head of it, not just another thug like their current imbeciles.

      Look at Iran though. As I type, it's happening there. The youth in Iran (25) make up more than 33% of their population. They've grown up, as have we, with the internet, with being able to speak to someone on another continent being "normal". They've also grown up seeing all these western freedoms, then wondering why in the west a woman can publish videos of herself getting gangbanged and no one cares, but in Iran if she walks down the street without wearing a headscarf, she'll get arrested for "indecency".
      They've grown up seeing internet sites in the west discussing the ethical differences between atheism, christianity and islam, with people saying "there is no God, it's a silly idea anyway", and then seeing the religious police walk past outside to make sure everyone prays at the right time.
      As I type this, there is likely another demonstration happening in Tehran of the sort we saw in recent weeks. But there's a difference now. Moussavi, long a supporter of the regime, is no longer in control of these. What started as a simple wish for the mostly-powerless president to be the one they voted for has no turned into a call for full democracy, an end to oppression, an end to the tyranny. "Death To The Dictator" they scream. And you think the internet isn't changing anything?
      Why do you think the Chinese are trying to ween the kids off the internet. It's not because they think they're spending too long playing WoW. Hell, the Chinese Govt. would probably love their populace all wired up to it, happily playing their game, not bothering anyone or calling for reform.
      No, it's in case after their 12-hour marathon WoW session, they talk to some western kid, and wonder why they can't read uncensored news, why they're "less worthy" than the european kid.
      It's a brave new world all right but there's no place in it for the ignorant fascism of yesteryear. Blind obedience from the people is no longer possible.

      --
      The truth shall always be free: Boris Floricic is Tron.
    76. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "sometimes I think that we Slashdotters would do well to relax and give them some time to sort things out (it is their own country, after all). They have a 5000 year old civilization"

      So, they need time but have a ancient 5000 year old system. If, after 5000 years, you haven't sorted things out I don't think the problem is having enough time.

    77. Re:Your Rights Online by noundi · · Score: 1

      ...psychological symptoms as depression, antisocial behavior, and slipping grades.

      I'd say science, because I've never heard of slipping grades as a psychological symptom.

      --
      I am the lawn!
    78. Re:Your Rights Online by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      /raises hand
      I agree

    79. Re:Your Rights Online by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Kids probably aren't paying for the Internet connection

      Read his post. It's not "not having an Internet connection" that takes away their rights, it's being forced to go to boot camp.

      and they do not have the rights of an adult

      The fact that children do not have rights such as voting etc doesn't mean that this is justified. Indeed, things are very inconsistent - normally when it comes to anything done by an individual that might remotely harm, scare or upset a child, children are held up as being one of society's treasured possessions (and indeed, plenty of YRO stories are about some nonsense being done in the name of "saving the children").

      Yet when the abuse is done by the state, whether it's school strip searches or boot camps, suddenly that's seen as okay (and not just China - I recall some worrying stories about teens being sent to places in the US, where they are subject to abuse that if it were done by a parent or family friend, it would be seen as child abuse, but done by an institution, it's perfectly acceptable).

      The addiction is hurting their intellectual and social progress.

      Well, we're both here sitting on Slashdot. Is our progress hurt? I'd probably count as "addicted" to the Internet if you went by raw hours, but only in the same sense that people were previously "addicted" to watching TV, listening to the radio, reading books, spending time in the pub.

      The argument about social progress is dubious, since these kids are playing online games and chatting. Even if you claim it's not as good as real life, that's irrelevant - before the Internet, these kids weren't out socialising in public, they were sitting at home watching TV.

      Americans send their fat kids to boot camp.

      All part of the same problem. "Other crap exists" is hardly a ringing endorsement.

    80. Re:Your Rights Online by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Spending 6 hours a day doing something does not make it an addiction.

      Right - and how many of those kids are there after being diagnosed with addiction, and how many are there as result of their parents thinking they are "spending too much time on the Internet"? (Or perhaps also, poor grades at school, even though they may be unrelated to Internet addiction.)

      And where is the scientific consensus that these "boot camps" are a good way to treat so-called "Internet addiction"?

      Spending time talking to people in Azeroth is not as socially healthy as talking to people face to face. It's healthier than spending time in front of a tv or book.

      Exactly - we don't have boot camps for people who "have their head stuck in a book all day".

    81. Re:Your Rights Online by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Not true, there are all sorts of things that parents cannot do to their children. Just because they're parents, doesn't mean people have to accept abuse.

      Just because it's done by an institution, rather than an individual, doesn't make it acceptable.

    82. Re:Your Rights Online by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      If one of my sons developed an Addiction that I could not help him with I would also seek eternal help.

      Unless you are qualified medically, I hope that you wouldn't be diagnosing him with addiction yourself.

      The question is - if you suspected your child had a problem, would you seek medical help, or would you cart him off to some "boot camp" where they treat his desire to play combat games by making him learn to fight, and improve his social skills by telling him to shut up and have a drill sergeant shout at him all day?

      Yes, Jesus Camps are bad too. Other crap exists isn't an argument.

    83. Re:Your Rights Online by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      If you treated heroin addiction by sending them to a boot camp, rather than doing what is medically and scientific considered to be most effective, I'd disagree with that too.

      And I can't believe you compared spending too much time on the Internet, to heroin addiction. Next time you post, perhaps you'll like to show me the scientific references that show these kids were physically addicted to the Internet? Thanks.

    84. Re:Your Rights Online by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      With your second paragraph, you're skirting the issue.

      You're the one skirting the issue, by setting up a false dichotomy.

      Do they send kids to boot camp for simply not going to the gym? If not, what's so special about using the Internet when they are at home?

      Is it a better social experience to speak

      Is it a better social experience to not speak, whilst some stranger yells orders in your face?

    85. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EVE Online also has a more realistic economic system out there (almost to the point of an economics sim) than most other MMOs. For that matter, while leadership and project planning may be important for many MMOs, a lack of planning, foresight, or diplomatic ability can really leave you up shit creek if you're running a corporation or more. So... honestly, EVE is better than a lot of them in this respect. That's probably also why some reviewers complain it's a second job. (I stopped playing when I suddenly developed a social life, for example, although I don't mean this as a slight on you. I couldn't balance it all and ended up dropping the thing that cost money.)

    86. Re:Your Rights Online by SeeSp0tRun · · Score: 2, Informative

      No waiver is ever signed that permits the physical abuse of a child. It is a paid service, not a penitentiary. The fat kids, or for the sake of staying on topic: internet addicted kids, are treated with as much respect as they show.
      These programs aren't the brutal prison scenes many may imagine.

      In the end, even if a kid doesn't lose one pound at fat (boot)camp, hopefully he can come away with the discipline to "just say no" to that Krispy Kreme.

      --
      Something witty.
    87. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention it isn't very fair. It's not like they can run from you. Or if they can, it's not like they can run fast.

      Fixed that for you.

    88. Re:Your Rights Online by thegnu · · Score: 1

      Healthier for your social skills, I guess. Certainly not for your orthography.

      I wouldn't even say that. The thing about books is they're not fooling you into thinking you're having human interaction.

      The problem with chatting online is that being social involves a lot more than just the data in the words. There's body language, vocal tone, and mostly ungoverned release of hormonal smells.

      I think chatting a lot is actually damaging if you haven't spent enough time in real social interaction, because you begin to rely on certain crutches that the chat provides you.

      Not that it doesn't help at all, but understanding how people bandy words about is a very rudimentary social skill. That's just been my experience.

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
    89. Re:Your Rights Online by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the people that you spent all that time Skyping with would love to find out that they're meaningless. You should also make sure to tell them that they're just sad and pathetic people, and that nobody should talk to them. It's not a meaningful relationship to you anyways, so who cares right?

      The only reason online communications could be considered less healthy than face to face communication is because of people like YOU. People who think that the person on the other end of the massive network isn't a real person, or that their relationship with their friend from afar is meaningless.

      Is there any more 'meaning' in it when you go to the beach with your friends than when you go kill a dragon with your friends? If there is, could you please measure this 'meaning' in a scientific way and report back to me on exactly how much more of it you get from being able to touch your friends versus only being able to hear them?

      With regards to the fake sense of accomplishment: you might want to go tell last years Superbowl winners to throw away their rings cause the whole thing is just a big charade. I'm sure they'll take it to heart when you inform them that it's really nothing special that they can put a freaking ball inside some chalk marks. While you're at it, go ahead and tell them that their relationships with their teammates were meaningless, because it was only to win a game.

      At one point in time there was something in your life that gave you great joy. Someone else came along and convinced you it was a lie. Are you in the wrong for having enjoyed yourself, or are they in the wrong for telling you that what you'd accomplished was worthless and that the relationships you'd formed were meaningless?

      Most of this addiction nonsense is just prejudice. Sure, there's a line where it does become harmful, but as long as you manage to feed yourself and hold a job, who cares what you do in your off time?

      I hope you read this, though I doubt you will as AC. Enjoy being lonely when you could be shooting things in space while laughing with friends you'd never have the opportunity to know in meatspace.

    90. Re:Your Rights Online by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      Your posting history is hilarious. You have like 20 comments debating the differences between various types of single-player RPGs, and several posts mocking people for playing video games that actually involve social contact with other people.

      "You might end up talking to someone at the gym, and at the very least you're among people. When you're playing WoW you're all by yourself."

      Thanks for this wonderful insight. I had been confused, you see. I was under the impression that the characters that were talking back to me in WoW were people. Now that I know they're robots I guess I'll stop talking to them. It's weird though, 'cause I talk to a lot of them over Ventrilo. I guess speech synth has advanced a lot over the past few years.

      "Contrary to what some nerds tell themselves, chatting online does nothing to improve your social skills."

      Ummm, so? I don't want to be freakin' president, I just want to play fun games while chatting with friends. I'd say that chatting online with friends while playing games is pretty damn good practice for that.

      "I can't remember ever doing any math in WoW, and the reading was mostly limited to finding out what I need to kill next."

      Ok, so you're bad at the game. Grats? You need to HAVE math skills in order to apply them to the game.

      "World of Warcraft is not productive or useful, and not a substitute for social interaction, intellectual stimulation and excercise."

      Neither are any of the video games YOU play. I'm sure you've quit playing them all since the aforementioned in-depth posts you've made about them, right?

    91. Re:Your Rights Online by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      So basically addiction is when they like their online friends better than they like you? That's pathetically jealous of you.

    92. Re:Your Rights Online by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Their behavior is their choice, not a disease. They need self discipline. That's the responsibility of the parent, not the state.

    93. Re:Your Rights Online by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      You're reversing cause and effect. Depression or stress causes people to do whatever they need to to cope with it, including habitual behavior mislabeled as "addiction" which is not a medical term. It's not the other way around. Addiction does not cause depression. Depression causes the illusion of addiction.

    94. Re:Your Rights Online by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is about as effective as a light rain in shanghai has on whether I play wow today or not (current location: Iceland).

      Of course, if you can find and link the website they have regarding this programme, slashdot could have an impact.

    95. Re:Your Rights Online by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Why is parent modded troll? This is very similar to an argument made by Jeffery Schaler Ph.D that "addiction" (not a medical term) is overused to label all sorts of *choices* enjoyed by the minority but frowned on by the majority. Addiction, as it is known as a concept in US society today, is a concept handed down by a cult like group, AA, which has no basis whatsoever in science or common sense.

    96. Re:Your Rights Online by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Depression from loss or trauma is very similar to withdrawal symptoms (Stanton Peele, Ph.D). If you find it so unnecessary to distinguish between hobby, habit, and addiction, perhaps you are unable to. What is the difference? The only difference I see is the approval of the majority over the actions of the minority and that holds true with your judgement over other peoples *choices* of social interaction. Who are you to judge whether or not a friendship is valid or whether a social interaction is deep enough. In some ways, it could be argued that the lack of physical interaction decreases social inhibition and increases the possibilities in which people can get to know each other intellectually and emotionally. Sometimes when a person is blind, they are more attuned to other senses. You could say that while online interactions lack in some areas, they excel in others. What the fuck is wrong with slashdot that you get modded insightful.

    97. Re:Your Rights Online by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Sometimes kids do get sent to boot camp for not going to the gym, or for being gay, or for in *any* reason not turning out the way their parents desire. They are property, essentially, and they can be incarcerated for any reason or no reason at all without due process. That's the reality and it happens a lot.

    98. Re:Your Rights Online by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      So basically your definition of addiction is a an activity another person enjoys on a regular basis that you do not approve of. And before you judge me, no, I have only played WoW once and didn't like it at all (seemed kind of repetitive)... not that it's relevant.

    99. Re:Your Rights Online by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The section is weird, but even more odd is the fact that this is in the GNUstep category. What on earth does a Chinese web addict camp have to do with an open source implementation of the OpenStep specification?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    100. Re:Your Rights Online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rights are an important part of humanity. Depriving people of that deprives them of their humanity. If we can't judge the Chinese government for depriving citizens of rights, then thats no different then allowing waterboarding in the US (its part of our culture) or cannibalism (theres nothing wrong with cannibalism, its part of their culture).

      What?! I'm Chinese-- cannibalism is a part of my culture? I must have missed the memo. Thanks! Om nom nom nom.

    101. Re:Your Rights Online by eugene2k · · Score: 1

      Parents also send their kids to school and make them do chores y'know... We should not tolerate this parental tyrrany any more! /sarcasm

      --
      Apple has "Mac vs PC", Microsoft has "Laptop Hunters", Linux has recession
    102. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible+II · · Score: 1

      Here's a thought. Lay off the f-bombs

      Boo-fucking-hoo. If you're such a prude that you can't even deal with swearing, I suggest you unplug your router, throw away your TV and never leave the house again. And by the way, my first post did not contain any swearing.

      don't reply to your posts to complain about the moderation

      What if I do? Are you going to come here and stop me?

      quit patronizing the people you post to with strawman sarcasm

      Oh noes, I used strawman sarcasm against a person who thinks WoW is a substitute for real life!

      stop calling the moderators names

      They are calling me a troll, and they have not posted any evidence to support their accusation. If they don't like being called names, they shouldn't attack people.

      and try to post like an adult

      Where have I not posted like an adult?

      You aren't being modded troll because people disagree with you

      That is exactly why I am modded a troll, and 99,9% of the time that is the only reason anyone gets modded down on Slashdot.

      you're being moderated troll because your posts are such utter garbage.

      Hell yeah bro, how dare someone claim that WoW is not a substitute for real life. Chatting on the trade channel is totally the same thing as talking to people in real life.

      It's not "moderator groupthink", it's "promoting civility", by keeping the trolls and flamers below the +1 mark.

      You don't know the first fucking thing about civility. All you care about is appearances.

    103. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible+II · · Score: 1

      Your posting history is hilarious. You have like 20 comments debating the differences between various types of single-player RPGs

      So?

      and several posts mocking people for playing video games that actually involve social contact with other people.

      What posts would those be?

      Thanks for this wonderful insight. I had been confused, you see. I was under the impression that the characters that were talking back to me in WoW were people. Now that I know they're robots I guess I'll stop talking to them. It's weird though, 'cause I talk to a lot of them over Ventrilo. I guess speech synth has advanced a lot over the past few years.

      The Internet is not a substitute for social interaction in real life. You're delusional.

      Ummm, so? I don't want to be freakin' president, I just want to play fun games while chatting with friends. I'd say that chatting online with friends while playing games is pretty damn good practice for that.

      Why are you pretending as if you're the original poster?

      Ok, so you're bad at the game. Grats? You need to HAVE math skills in order to apply them to the game.

      WoW does not require any mathematics. I played it for years and cannot remember ever performing a single calculation.

      Neither are any of the video games YOU play. I'm sure you've quit playing them all since the aforementioned in-depth posts you've made about them, right?

      If you try to promote WoW as a substitute for real life, then I would expect it to be a useful and productive game.

    104. Re:Your Rights Online by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Is there any more 'meaning' in it when you go to the beach with your friends than when you go kill a dragon with your friends?

      When you do something in the real world, you experience far more than you do in any computer game or simulation. When you communicate in person with a friend, the experience is far more "real" than hearing a disembodied voice coming thru a speaker.

      For example, you're with a friend and somebody starts ranting about Internet addiction. You might catch your friend's eye, glance over at the ranter, and roll your eyes. It happens all the time, and it is far more expressive than anything you can type or say when you are having a "virtual" experience.

      I've done a fair amount of games where some form of "crafting" was part of the game. Load up components, click a button. Maybe you have to click at just the right time or in just the right pattern to "create" something. Well, recently I've been taking a pottery class, learning to hand build and throw pottery on the wheel. Getting the tactile feeling of the thickness, the moisture content, and the texture of the clay. Seeing how the parts of pottery are joined and smoothed together. The experience is infinitely richer than anything that can be had by sitting behind a screen. If you truly think that the virtual dragon kill is as "meaningful" as really hiking up a mountain, you are going out of your way to delude yourself.

      This doesn't mean that games are bad or evil, they can be a fun way to pass some time. But if they are the centerpiece of your life, if your life consists of sitting at keyboard, you are experiencing a pale shadow of the real world, and I feel sorry for you.

    105. Re:Your Rights Online by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      "So?"

      You really didn't have to ask me the purpose of that point. If you'd finished reading the sentence you quoted it would have been obvious.

      "What posts would those be?"

      And naught but 10 inches across the screen we find:
      "People who do nothing but sit in their mom's basement and play WoW and masturbate to Night Elf /dance animations all day long aren't going to put up with that shit, no sir."

      "The Internet is not a substitute for social interaction in real life. You're delusional."

      Your only argument on this point has been 'no it's not'. It's like I'm arguing with a damn fourth grader. Let's try defining "social interaction":

      Social: Of or related to society.

      Society:
          1. A long-standing group of people sharing cultural aspects such as language, dress, norms of behavior and artistic forms.
            2. A group of people who meet from time to time to engage in a common interest.
            3. The sum total of all voluntary interrelations between individuals.
            4. The people of oneâ(TM)s country or community taken as a whole.
          5. high society.
            6. (law) A number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act a common goal.

      So the dictionary doesn't seem to include "in real life" in any of it's definitions for society. What takes place over the internet is therefore most definitely social interaction. Your argument basically boils down to "what you do on the internet isn't real life", which once again makes me wonder why you seem to think I'm talking to imaginary people. It's not like they don't exist when I'm not in front of the computer talking to them. You're delusional for thinking what happens on the internet isn't "real life".

      Please be thoughtful in your response. I'd love to be proven wrong, but so far all you've said is 'no'.

      "Why are you pretending as if you're the original poster?"

      What? I'm not. Just thought I could defend his positions.

      "WoW does not require any mathematics. I played it for years and cannot remember ever performing a single calculation."

      Listen, the entire game is based around math. Probability, statistics, game theory, local minima/maxima, etc.; if you played it for years without doing a single calculation, you were undoubtedly a horrible player. Don't say that the game can't improve math skills when you never made the effort to understand the term "DPS". WoW requires math like playing soccer requires exercise.

      Don't even try telling me that playing soccer isn't healthy.

      "If you try to promote WoW as a substitute for real life, then I would expect it to be a useful and productive game."

      What the hell is that even supposed to mean? "Substitute for a real life"? Who was promoting it as such? Has anyone ever said "You should quit your job to farm WoW gold"?

      "Real life" is an idiotic term anyways. I'm going to call up my bank right now and tell them to shut down all their internet banking systems, 'cause that's not "real life". I'm also going to throw away my webcam, 'cause I only use it to talk to my grandparents living three states away. They'll understand when I tell them it's not "real life", and that they can just wait til Christmas to see my face.

      I'm a level 80 blood elf. I'm also a programmer. Both of these are my "real life". When I stop playing WoW I'll pick up another video game, and, guess what, that will be my "real life" too.

    106. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible+II · · Score: 1

      You really didn't have to ask me the purpose of that point. If you'd finished reading the sentence you quoted it would have been obvious.

      I don't see anything obvious about it. Again: so?

      And naught but 10 inches across the screen we find:
      "People who do nothing but sit in their mom's basement and play WoW and masturbate to Night Elf /dance animations all day long aren't going to put up with that shit, no sir."

      And?

      Your only argument on this point has been 'no it's not'.

      It's all the argumentation I need, since chatting in WoW obviously isn't even remotely similiar to real life social interaction.

      Listen, the entire game is based around math. Probability, statistics, game theory, local minima/maxima, etc.; if you played it for years without doing a single calculation, you were undoubtedly a horrible player.

      I never had to calculate anything. If you can't play WoW without constantly whipping out a calculator, you're the one who sucks at the game.

      Don't say that the game can't improve math skills when you never made the effort to understand the term "DPS". WoW requires math like playing soccer requires exercise.

      Please quote the post where I said that I never made the effort to understand the term DPS. Look, just stop making shit up and pretending like WoW is anything but a fucking video game. It's not going to make you the life of the party and it's not going to improve your mathematical ability. You're obviously trying to justify the amount of time you waste playing WoW. It's like me defending the amount of time I spent playing Left 4 Dead by claiming that I'm just preparing for the zombie apocalypse.

      What the hell is that even supposed to mean? "Substitute for a real life"? Who was promoting it as such?

      You.

      Has anyone ever said "You should quit your job to farm WoW gold"?

      No, but I expect you'll say it at some point.

      "Real life" is an idiotic term anyways. I'm going to call up my bank right now and tell them to shut down all their internet banking systems, 'cause that's not "real life".

      I never said or even remotely implied that the Internet is not a part of real life.

    107. Re:Your Rights Online by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      "When you do something in the real world, you experience far more than you do in any computer game or simulation. When you communicate in person with a friend, the experience is far more 'real' than hearing a disembodied voice coming thru a speaker."

      So basically you fail at abstraction? You're unable to piece together the fact that there is indeed a person on the other side of that speaker, and the fact that they are actually speaking to you? Even YOU are putting "real" in quotes, as if you know it's just as real, but that doesn't help support your point.

      "For example, you're with a friend and somebody starts ranting about Internet addiction. You might catch your friend's eye, glance over at the ranter, and roll your eyes. It happens all the time, and it is far more expressive than anything you can type or say when you are having a 'virtual' experience."

      Some of us have learned to use forms of communication other than body language. Is an eye rolling really necessary to get across the message? Is it even the best way? It could be interpreted as "Wow, this guy's an idiot", or "Not this again", or "This guy pisses me off". Each of those three sentences is more expressive and conveys more information. Therefore each one provides a better window as to what's going on in my head. One might even say that by expressing my thoughts in a verbal manner, I make them more "real". Even if you argue that eye rolling expresses perhaps all three, or if you argue that the interpretation of the ambiguity is part of the communication, well, to that I say: -_-

      "I've done a fair amount of games where some form of 'crafting' was part of the game. Load up components, click a button. Maybe you have to click at just the right time or in just the right pattern to 'create' something. Well, recently I've been taking a pottery class, learning to hand build and throw pottery on the wheel. Getting the tactile feeling of the thickness, the moisture content, and the texture of the clay. Seeing how the parts of pottery are joined and smoothed together. The experience is infinitely richer than anything that can be had by sitting behind a screen."

      Alright, now go kill a dragon. I'll be awaiting your response; I'm interested in just how rewarding it is in real life.

      "If you truly think that the virtual dragon kill is as 'meaningful' as really hiking up a mountain, you are going out of your way to delude yourself."

      I've hiked up mountains. Three of them, in fact. It was fun, but not as fun as my first Kael'Thas kill. And it was nowhere NEAR as fun as getting the Immortal title, which involved getting all the way through Naxx without me or any of my friends dying. I actually had to work harder for these than I worked to get to the top of the mountains (and no, I didn't start 100ft from the summit), and I achieved these things with people I liked a lot better than the ones I went up the mountain with. Who are you to say that this isn't meaningful? That working with my teammates to develop a superior strategy one attempt at a time isn't rewarding? That sharing jokes and stories while waiting for people to respawn isn't social? Making pottery is stupid. Oh wow, you can fold clay, I'm sure your friends and relatives really love their new, ugly vase/flowerpot/lump.

      "This doesn't mean that games are bad or evil, they can be a fun way to pass some time. But if they are the centerpiece of your life, if your life consists of sitting at keyboard, you are experiencing a pale shadow of the real world, and I feel sorry for you."

      And if you're limiting yourself to the "real world" out of prejudice, then I feel sorry for you.

    108. Re:Your Rights Online by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      You're not even making an effort to try and understand my points. It's like you read two sentences and your brain shorts out. Have fun being stupid.

    109. Re:Your Rights Online by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      I guess you don't understand what a universal right is? It means it's a right, not something that's earned. Even some selfish bastard who nobody likes still has rights.

      Yes, that would be my point.

      The idea of people having such formally declared rights in the absence of any kind of formally declared responsibilities that come with those rights is a very western thing, and in the larger picture of human cultures is kind of warped.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    110. Re:Your Rights Online by Dr.+Impossible+II · · Score: 1

      Oh snap, looks like someone got owned.

    111. Re:Your Rights Online by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      >Remember rights are not granted to you by the state, and they cannot be taken away.

      This only applies if you believe there is a higher authority in this world than "The State."

      The government of China neither encourages nor allows such a belief...

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  2. I'm not addict! by Mishotaki · · Score: 1

    I can stop whenever i want.... just let me post one more time....

    1. Re:I'm not addict! by S7urm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      oh yeah! well I'm addicted to getting Frist Prost!

      oh wait.........that was my first one :(

      --
      "This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
    2. Re:I'm not addict! by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least the Chinese don't get fat

      Oh, don't worry, they're catching up.

      That's the great thing about exporting American culture... eventually, the rest of the world will be as fat and lazy as we are.

      It's obvious where this is going. Just read all the articles about the billions we're spending on the development of remote control flying killing machines. Our enemies will be too fat too run away, but our technology will allow us to fight even as we need to clean ourselves with a rag-on-a-stick.

      World domination is at hand!

      MWUA-HA-HA-HORK-acktph-[gasp]-[grunt]-HORK-[splat]-HA-HA-HA

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:I'm not addict! by tokyoahead · · Score: 0

      They do. And not too little. The Chinese one-child policy has led to a behavior that the single child of the many-headed family gets spoiled beyond belief. Since the whole family lives together, a 4 to 8 headed family can cook for the little brat.

      Regularly, on Chinese new year, where sweets and food are even more popular than anyhow already in Chinese daily life, thousands of kids are admitted to hospital because of digestion trouble. When the Chinese Zodiac of the "golden pig" had it's turn (last year?), a Hong Kong newspaper had a picture of a hospital in China that was completely overcrowded with fat little kids on it's front page with the headline "The year of the Golden Pig(s)!"

      --
      no sig
    4. Re:I'm not addict! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I can quit anytime as well I mean how hard would that Right ???

    5. Re:I'm not addict! by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Me neither, Just...one..more...turn "Sid Meier's" :-)

    6. Re:I'm not addict! by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      I do sometimes wonder whether 'doing something because you like it' isn't necessarily an addiction. I mean, I go to the pub quite regularly, to meet friends and have a beer. And I wouldn't willingly stop doing it, because I enjoy it. Does that mean I'm addicted?

    7. Re:I'm not addict! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since that is so ridiculous already, just hijacking high enough to be read. (Not that it will ever beeven seen, with that ridiculous "50 best comments only" crap.)

      TFS made me think, yeah, right, so the Chinese govt thinks like a stereotypical strict daddy, "go to the army and they'll make a man of ya"? Yeah, good idea that. Go train for combat the people who have the most reasons for hating you. Oh, yeah, I know, brainwashing is such an ugly word... but then, a mind that doesn't resist brainwashing is not worthy of independent thought anyway.

    8. Re:I'm not addict! by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Indeed - it's like those news stories of people who can't "survive" two weeks without Internet. This ignores that the Internet is fast becoming essential in modern living. How many people before the Internet would survive without TV or phone for two weeks?

  3. Cynical thought by jaxtherat · · Score: 2, Funny

    Also a great way of recruiting for their already massive army...

    --
    http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
    1. Re:Cynical thought by royallthefourth · · Score: 1

      When you've got a country with that many people and that much manufacturing capacity, you can get a huge army without resorting to oddball tactics like this.

      I think the real reason is genuine concern over a social problem that may be far more pronounced in China than it is here. They also have a heavy-handed government that doesn't mind creating a new social program at the drop of a hat, so they end up with all kinds of (wacky) things being done so that every branch of every agency can say "Look what we did!"

    2. Re:Cynical thought by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Also a great way of recruiting for their already massive army...

      Something tells me the People's Liberation Army doesn't exactly have to do recruitment drives.

      (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army#Conscription_and_terms_of_service)

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    3. Re:Cynical thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's communism, if you don't make them see that you are "helping" them as a society all the time then they might start questioning the government's authority and we can't have them. Keep them in a constant sense of danger and they'll be much easier to keep subverted. There is no concern on the part of a government. The government there just wants to maintain total power over the people and enrich the Party members, make no mistake otherwise. At least we get the chance to throw the bums out every 2 - 4 years (and 6 sometimes). They however have to suck ass whenever the government says to suck ass.

  4. Boys and Girls by arizwebfoot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    World of Warcraft and Counter-Strike... those that hook the most patients (boys)

    Online chat programs more often hook girls

    Why am I not surprised that the girls like to talk and the boys like to play combat (remember cowboys and indians? cops and robbers?).

    Very indicative of our society as a whole. Just sayin' . . .

    --
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
    1. Re:Boys and Girls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I thought it was pretty good, though may be quite the stereotyping, but then who doesn't.

    2. Re:Boys and Girls by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Online chat programs more often hook girls"

      Why am I not surprised that the girls like to talk and the boys like to play combat (remember cowboys and indians? cops and robbers?).

      I know, right? I mean, when I'm online on chat sites, it's amazing that all the people who are on all day are girls. Take last Sunday, for example. 4 AM... a bunch of girls are online, and some guys. 10 AM... the same girls but a bunch of different guys. 4 PM... still the same girls, and new guys. 8 PM... same deal.

      I mean seriously, the only people who are addicted to chat and are on all day are girls.

      [pause for gender identification]

      Well, and one guy. At least.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:Boys and Girls by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Why am I not surprised that the girls like to talk and the boys like to play combat (remember cowboys and indians? cops and robbers?). Very indicative of our society as a whole.

      Women are more social and emotional. Men are more physical and logical. Of course, there's always a rule to the exception. But on the whole, this is human nature. It's rooted in our DNA.

      If you ask me, I don't find this surprising in the least.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:Boys and Girls by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Why am I not surprised that the girls like to talk and the boys like to play combat (remember cowboys and indians? cops and robbers?).

      Very indicative of our society as a whole. Just sayin' . . .

      OUR society? You're chinese? You might want to log off now, I bet at those boot camps, the regular web addicts pick on the slashdotters.

    5. Re:Boys and Girls by selven · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't you know that FBI agents have shifts?

    6. Re:Boys and Girls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Online chat programs more often hook girls

      Why am I not surprised that the girls like to talk and the boys like to play combat (remember cowboys and indians? cops and robbers?).

      Very indicative of our society as a whole. Just sayin' . . .

      It's not indicative of anyone's society. It's indicative of our biology.

    7. Re:Boys and Girls by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      I think it's hard to generalise from this poor data. Anyhow, I thought that plenty of women played WoW? I'm not sure if there are any actual stats on this.

      An obvious point is that there's also the selection bias, in that this only measures teenagers who are sent to this boot camp. For example, it wouldn't surprise me if girls who spend too much time on chat programmes are more likely to be seen as a problem by their parents, than boys who do so (what with all the fear and scaremongering that an adult might be preying on their precious daughter).

      Although yes, I don't disagree that it's indicative of our society. At least one gender role is being broken here in that girls are (presumably) treated the same as boys at this "boot camp".

      On another note, I love that their so-called "addiction" to playing fictional combat games is going to be "treated" by making them wear military uniforms, learn military drill, and learn how to fight for real. Nice one.

      And as for those whose "addiction" was chatting online, forcing them to fight seems entirely inappropriate and unhelpful (and would surely do far more harm to their social skills).

  5. Boot Camp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw the title and thought of the Windows compatibility software. Maybe I need some of that therapy...

    1. Re:Boot Camp by Slashdot+Suxxors · · Score: 1

      Boot Camp is just a fancy dual boot on Intel-based Apple machines.

    2. Re:Boot Camp by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

      I saw the first line and though, Wow! Chinese web addicts are being given boot camp-- great move, now they'll be able to run their Windows applicatons on Apple machines!

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  6. evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because as we all know, the whole internet is evil. There are obviously no good uses for it, and obviously, it is all games and time wasters.

    1. Re:evil. by calmofthestorm · · Score: 1

      Don't forget child porn and cyberterrorism. They have those there too.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
  7. Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    American - kill all your allies in 'friendly' fire incidents. Full auto on anything that moves, may move or have previously moved. Aw Hell full auto on anything.

    Chinese (according to the Geneva Convention on war ) Day 1 - One million unarmed troops invade Alaska and surrender.
    Day 2 - One million unarmed troops invade Alaska and surrender.
    Day 3 - One million unarmed troops invade Alaska and surrender.
    .
    .
    Day 5 - US economy collapses US surrenders.

    1. Re: Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously we're going to have to start shooting people who are trying to surrender. It's just simple economics.

    2. Re: Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US Counter-strategy:

      The boats the Chinese used mysteriously sink.

      Either that, or donate Alaska back to Russia for a bit.

    3. Re: Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I was going to say Texas but I doubt even the Chinese want to go there.

    4. Re: Military Strategy by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That sounds like our history of immigration.
      Wave after wave, all of them eventually assimilated. It turns out to be pretty good for the economy.

    5. Re: Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American - kill all your allies in 'friendly' fire incidents. Full auto on anything that moves, may move or have previously moved. Aw Hell full auto on anything.

      Chinese (according to the Geneva Convention on war ) Day 1 - One million unarmed troops invade Alaska and surrender.
      Day 2 - One million unarmed troops invade Alaska and surrender.
      Day 3 - One million unarmed troops invade Alaska and surrender.
      .
      .
      Day 5 - We nuke Alaska. We win!

      There, fixed that for ya!!!!!

    6. Re: Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, man, the original was something like this:

      during the sino-soviet split, the chinese general HQ drew up plans for three combat actions:

      a) the great offensive
      b) the little offensive
      c) infiltrations across the border in small groups of 2-3 million

    7. Re: Military Strategy by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Depending on whose economy you are talking about.
      Two words: Glass pearls.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    8. Re: Military Strategy by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Wow what a demonstration of lack of knowledge of history and economics.

      Money isn't real. It is imaginary, even gold back (As gold is a mineral which we really don't need to live.). Paper Notes and coins are just representations of this imaginary concept.
      Money is a system in where we don't need to barter objects as the barter system would be too complex and we will spend most of our time trying to barder everything vs actually doing work.
      Eg.
      I spend 4 hours programming for this I get 300 lbs of rice. Now I will need to find people who will take my rice say 50 lbs of it and replace it for cable service, however the cable company has enough rice but they want Apples so I have to find people selling apples and needs rice to trade them for it then I give them the apples.... In the end you will spend most of you awake life trying to get your goods that you need by trading for everything.

      So that is why we came up with this money system. So we have a universally convertible method of trading our goods.
      Now we get in influx of 3 million people. Yes they need more but they can also do more. Because we now have 3 million more people doing work and asking for services that means an overall improvement in the economy. There might be a short term dip while they are trying to find their place but overall it is a good thing.

      You view is based more of racism and nationalism then good thinking.
      The late 20th century is the period we had the greatest rise in the economy. Why Baby Boomers, the US had an influx in population and we finally had resources to keep them alive. So it greatly improved the economy. How is having a bunch of Americans being born vs. immigrants moving in is any different overall (Long term) to the economy, there isn't. It is just the immigrants have strange ways, different languages and funny accents, that makes us feel uncomfortable and then we say it will kill the economy so we don't look like a bunch of bigots.

      That said there is still the issue of the short term, and effects on particular localities. That need to address too. But in the long term that would help the US economy not kill it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    9. Re: Military Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We didn't have 300 million+ people (or welfare for immigrants) when those waves of immigrations took place. Think about it.

  8. These drils and training by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's the grind like once you hit level 30?

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:These drils and training by node+3 · · Score: 1

      All the "grinding" is done before level 30. At 30, you move on to Carousel.

    2. Re:These drils and training by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > At 30, you move on to Carousel

      Nice reference to Blade Runner there!

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    3. Re:These drils and training by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > At 30, you move on to Carousel.

      Nice reference to Silent Running there!

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    4. Re:These drils and training by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > At 30, you move on to Carousel.

      Nice reference to Soylent Green there!

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    5. Re:These drils and training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice reference to Soylent Green there!

      Nice reference to Rollerball there!

  9. The most devestating technique in their arsenal.. by Mauzl · · Score: 5, Funny

    .. exposure to girls.

  10. This guy is basically an asshole. by mynickslongerthanurs · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here goes his business model:

    1, Preach on media the harm of "Internet Addiction" on children.
    2, Tell irresponsible parents that it's not their fault (which actually is).
    3, Open an "Internet Addition" rehab.
    4, Charge rediculous fees.
    5, Abuse his patients untill they promise (or pretend to promise) they will never play World of Warcraft (or whatever their parents deem as harmful) again.
    6, Parents get pleased and more parents send their kids to his rehab.
    7, PROFIT!

    After all, I must say he's slightly better than the ultimate asshole named Yang Yongxin. At least he doesn't employ high voltage shock therapy in his rehab.

    1. Re:This guy is basically an asshole. by node+3 · · Score: 2

      2, Tell irresponsible parents that it's not their fault (which actually is).

      Do explain how it's the parents' fault? It's not like the parents were trying to get their kids addicted to the Internet. They (like any responsible parent should), gave their children access to the Internet. That the children became addicted to it is part of the child's psychological response. There's no way a parent can be expected to anticipate this and have the training to be able to redirect their kid's attention before the signs of addiction become apparent.

      It's like saying the parents are to blame if their kid gets the chicken pox. Sure, if they deliberately exposed their kid to it, but letting their kids go to school and play with other kids isn't something you can really blame them for.

    2. Re:This guy is basically an asshole. by Fluffeh · · Score: 1

      3, Open an "Internet Addition" rehab.

      Is that like asking Google to calculate something, or more like a rehab center for people who have done too much maths?

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    3. Re:This guy is basically an asshole. by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      1, Preach on media the harm of "Internet Addiction" on children.
      2, Tell irresponsible parents that it's not their fault (which actually is).
      3, Open an "Internet Addition" rehab.
      4, Charge rediculous fees.
      5, Abuse his patients untill they promise (or pretend to promise) they will never play World of Warcraft (or whatever their parents deem as harmful) again.
      6, Parents get pleased and more parents send their kids to his rehab.
      7, PROFIT!

      8. Kids go back to playing WoW
      9. Parents confront kids, threaten to send them back to camp
      10. Kids use newly acquired martial arts skills to kick parents' asses till they shut up.
      11. Bankruptcy!

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    4. Re:This guy is basically an asshole. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Perpetual business idea! They will come again, with another addiction since you didn't take away the original, underlying problem that made them turn towards addictive behaviour in the first place.

      That's a gold mine, you need a partner?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:This guy is basically an asshole. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... "any responsible parent" should give their children access to the internet? What the fuck?

    6. Re:This guy is basically an asshole. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really??? Letting your 12 year old play online 12 hours a day instead of doing something proactive like taking him to the park is the childs own fault? Like he knows better? An average 12 year old would pick the real world where people can see his dorkyness, acne and any other flaw that might get him rejected by a girl over the internet where he can talk to the world without sharing too much about himself? Really??

  11. Where do I sign up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTA:
    "...The teens are subjected to a strict regimen of military drills, martial arts training, lectures..."

    So they're teaching these depressed internet-addicted teens to be real-life ninjas? Here in the US, being a depressed internet-addicted teen gets you beat-up at school and rejected by women.

    You win this round, China.

  12. World is a changing... by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Interesting

    50 years ago, going out was the norm. 20 years ago, occasionally going out was the norm.

    Today, spending an evening at home is the norm, where it's cheaper and you can connect with someone halfway across the world who you know will share your interests, and not spurn you(and if they do, you can find someone else). You're also not faced with personal problems such as personal performance, social anxiety, or the real fear of making an ass out of yourself, etc. There's people you never have to face, but will listen.

    Move forward 10 years, as the new kiddie-tech generation moves even further online? I see individuals who will prefer to remain connected at all costs because of this. We have people now who need to know all information at all times, need make sure that they're in instant contact with the world around them. And are experiencing this now.

    I don't see it changing, I see it increasing. China, US, Canada, any country in the world can do whatever they like to try and change it. But the more interconnected the world becomes, the smaller it gets. The smaller it gets, the more people want to remain connected to it.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
    1. Re:World is a changing... by twostix · · Score: 1

      Fifty years ago my parents went to town once a week on a Sunday and once every second week on a thursday to do the grocery shopping. If they were lucky once every three to six months they'd do something "social" and that usually meant visiting relatives and staying with them in their house or vice a versa or going to a dance.

      70 years ago my grandparents would go a month or two without seeing anyone else except their neighbors - given that town was a three hour trip by horse and the nearest city two days...

      The idea of "going out" and being some sort of social butterfly on the town for the vast majority of people is pretty new.

    2. Re:World is a changing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China, US, Canada, any country in the world can do whatever they like to try and change it. But the more interconnected the world becomes, the smaller it gets. The smaller it gets, the more people want to remain connected to it.

      As the world gets smaller, it is running out of room for giants like "China, US, Canada, any country." What is the point of nations when we have a global community? Soon, we will reorganize into interest groups instead.

    3. Re:World is a changing... by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Funny

      The thing I'd like to know is. How much does it cost to send my own kids to China for a bootcamp? Do they need to know Chinese? I don't have any kids yet, nor a girlfriend yet. I'm just pre-planning.

    4. Re:World is a changing... by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're right. I imagine that most people that stay home do so with their family and friends (the physically proximate kind), much like it's always been. I'm a young person and everybody I know is constantly on facebook, IM/chat, dating sites, etc. and we still go out and meet up constantly. The internet for our generation is a tool that facilitates physical interaction, not inhibits it.

      As for the people with social problems, these things have always existed. The internet may be an outlet for people who experience social problems, but I think it's a stretch to say that it can cause social anxiety and the like. I would have to see some pretty solid evidence supporting that before I would believe it.

    5. Re:World is a changing... by Hitokiri+Battousai · · Score: 1

      But that won't be a problem, because then this will happen. People will be able to interact socially in meatspace and cyberspace at the same time.

    6. Re:World is a changing... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Hmm... when I look back at the development of the last decade and how quickly we catch up, I dare say that by the time you have kids, you won't have to send them to China...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:World is a changing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. What boggles my mind is that the more people I talk to (at least in my age group, late 20's) the more and more assholes I find. It's really incredible to me that in a world where human contact is becoming more and more scarce seem to be closing ourselves off to the prospect of having decent communications with others. People 10 years older than I am seem to have less of an issue, those who didn't grow up plugged into the Net. Many of them seem to have healthy social networks, go out and do things, and generally enjoy themselves. I can't say it's causation, but it might point us in the right direction.

    8. Re:World is a changing... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      Surprisingly, the Bootcamp takes 60-day Prepaid Time cards, which are about $30.00 USD

    9. Re:World is a changing... by brkello · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between staying connected and being so addicted that you can not function as a productive member of society.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    10. Re:World is a changing... by Psyber_Netik · · Score: 0

      10 years? How about now!!! Give me two minutes, my phone, and a 3G signal and I can find out anything I need. Cell phones are literally becoming mini-computers focused on on-line services. Twitter clients for BBerry's, iPhones, and WM6 are a good example of it. It went from "who calls anyone anymore, everybody txts these days" to "who calls or txts? Don't you have IM or email on your phone?". I use my computer about 50% less now since I got my HTC Fuze with unlimited TXT and Data plan; with the lowest amount of minutes I might add. I always have Myspace, Facebook, Tiny Twitter, skype, Google Latitude, and IM running. If I could figure out how to merge my 1TB drive and my music I wouldn't need my laptop. Now I maintain a constant online presence and can still get crunk in the clubs. Honestly, I think it's just the games screwing them up. Take a needle and scratch the disk they use to install it then delete one of the games DLL's. They'll never know you did it. They'll think the computer is acting up.

      --
      #find / -iname "*id10t*" -exec rm {} \;
    11. Re:World is a changing... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Is there really a difference between being connected and being addicted, when the world demands that you be connected in order to do your job? See where and what I'm getting at? This isn't the social butterfly effect, it's the information effect. The need to be overloaded, and have a constant stream of information, knowledge or connection with people even if it's not face to face.

      Functioning as a productive member of society is rather moot to be honest. Can you really define productive, and what productive is to a person? Or is it in the terms of being a cog in the machine? Or is it relative to their own state of happiness.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:World is a changing... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Comparatively speaking, and this is something I should point out. Social isolationism is the new effect, remember that people generally function best in groups of under 200 people. It was the change from the agrarian society, to post-industrial, industrial to cities, with staggered, large city blocks with a lack of communication that led to direct isolation. The reverse was hyper-isolation, where people 'moved-out' in order to produce something.

      This is the connectedness within the family block, not unlike what I was talking about with the need to be socialized within a family unit. Remember that being a 'social butterfly' isn't a new concept, it's old, ancient as the hills.

      Remember that a family is still a social block, even if you don't see it as such. Just because it's not something "new", doesn't mean it's not the social butterfly effect.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  13. First China, then... by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1, Funny

    If this works in China, it will be the next Obama Youth program...

    1. Re:First China, then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this works in China, it will be the next Obama Youth program...

      Absolutely not! Electric shocks would never be used. That would be cruel and unusual. Lectures by Al Gore, however...

  14. Yes, that makes sense by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Take a bunch of kids that like to sit around playing games and browsing for porn, isolate them from friends and family, label them as "addicts", brainwash them, put rifles in their hands and train them how to kill people, then declare them "cured". I'm glad that society has its priorities right.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Yes, that makes sense by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Take a bunch of kids that like to sit around playing games and browsing for porn, isolate them from friends and family, label them as "addicts", brainwash them, put rifles in their hands and train them how to kill people, then declare them "cured". I'm glad that society has its priorities right.

      Plus side: chinese army staging a coup demanding porn and WOW will be pretty entertaining in a few years.

    2. Re:Yes, that makes sense by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you were really paranoid, you might speculate as to whether this was a drone pilot recruitment program.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Yes, that makes sense by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Hey, our conservative nutjobs have been claiming that "killer games" are nothing but training programs for would-be shootists, so at least they already accomplished the basic rifle training! Perfect soldier material.

      (Yes, I'm aware that WoW ain't really a FPS, but it adds a lot of entertainment to their speeches when they refuse to see the difference)

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  15. Good idea. by spyder-implee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in China mind you) I highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens.

    --
    Take what ye can. Give nothing back!
    1. Re:Good idea. by CarpetShark · · Score: 5, Funny

      Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in China mind you) I highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens.

      Of course, having gone through boot camp, you'll never know for sure if that's really what you think, or if that's what they told you to think ;)

    2. Re:Good idea. by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Funny

      Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in China mind you) I highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens.

      Productive you say? I can't help noticing you're posting to /. ...

    3. Re:Good idea. by spyder-implee · · Score: 1

      Your military budget at work my friend. :)

      --
      Take what ye can. Give nothing back!
    4. Re:Good idea. by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Basically, you've been brainwashed to obey orders and view people who live their own lives as "useless." Ah, the military, gotta love 'em.

    5. Re:Good idea. by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1

      I think the productive effect of said training is highly dependent on the degree to which it was voluntary.

    6. Re:Good idea. by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      You mean "useless" people that are the foundation for every economy? You mean "useless" people who invent stuff? "Useless" people who make music? Really, all boot camp does is tell you to follow orders. In the end, when you have a bunch of people following orders, you have basically useless people. In the end it is always the free thinking and creative people who change and alter the world that will make it a better place.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    7. Re:Good idea. by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 0

      Having gone through boot camp I know that it teaches the smarter folks to stay under the radar and let the idiots have all the attention. The downside to that is that those same idiots will be your supervisors years later.

      What you said about it turning useless idiots into productive citizens is really a crap-shoot. Some straighten-up, others use their skills for bad things. It also turns people who thought they were productive in high school into useless idiots because they can't think outside the box. Many of them stay in the service because they're so used to being told what to do, having their lives managed down to slightest wiping of the ass.

    8. Re:Good idea. by spyder-implee · · Score: 1

      Rubbish. You think because you're not in the military you're not just a brainwashed consumer listening to your mass-marketed music with your iPhone and facebook? Yeah, you're a real free thinking individual.

      --
      Take what ye can. Give nothing back!
    9. Re:Good idea. by twostix · · Score: 1

      What exactly is a "useless person"?

      People should learn their place as productive units in the larger social machine. Because after all, the group comes before the individual doesn't it.

    10. Re:Good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, I often wish I could join the military just to whip some discipline into me. Too bad I'm medically disqualified.

    11. Re:Good idea. by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Please tell me how going to boot camp really made you a more productive individual to society.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    12. Re:Good idea. by sonamchauhan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, he's been trained. He still has free choice (he's posting to slashdot, isn't he?), and his training helped him overcome his previous undisciplined, capricious habits.

      While you, dear person, are trying to brainwash others into your peculiar groupthink - that military style training aimed at developing self-discipline is "brainwashing" and inherently evil.

    13. Re:Good idea. by spyder-implee · · Score: 1

      A high level of first aid training & the ability to use it in extremely stressful situations. Just one example, but something I take pride in being able to apply. Something many of the blokes could not afford out of their own pocket.

      --
      Take what ye can. Give nothing back!
    14. Re:Good idea. by thegnu · · Score: 1

      I think it's a good idea. I just think that the government doing it is a really unhealthy way of regulating society.

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
    15. Re:Good idea. by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in China mind you) I highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens.

      Having gone through Boot Camp myself, I have to say that I don't find myself more productive running Windows than Mac OS X. Quite the opposite in fact.

      As for being useless, I'm pretty much equally useless on either OS...

    16. Re:Good idea. by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      What the military does is most certainly brainwashing.

    17. Re:Good idea. by ihavnoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in United States, I live in a country where millitary service is mandatory) I also highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens. On the other side, it is a good way to turn useful people into far less productive citizens.

      My opinion is that, the main goal of the boot camp is to create an average person, not too smart, not to dumb, not too hardworking, not to lazy, etc. Transforming normal people into standardized soldiers.

      The problem is, that when that person returns to his original environment, it doesn't take so long to see a 'standardized' person to return to his normal lifestyle. I saw numerous friends who found out 'how lazy they were, and how worthless they were' on the boot camp, and found that they also can achieve things if they try hard enough. However, after finishing their millitary service and returning to their original environment, it didn't take long to return to their original life pattern.

      What I saw, along with many other people saw, was that game addiction, and probably web addiction, is an symptom of other problems, not itself being the problem. Those guys may have problem with their friends, their school, their parents, or whatsoever. Sending them to the boot camp may solve some of them (no more school, no more previous friends, and no more parents yelling at you), but once they are out of the boot camp, everything returns to the previous state.

    18. Re:Good idea. by ihavnoid · · Score: 1

      What the military does is most certainly brainwashing.

      So is the TV, public schools, parents, friends, and whatever. You can even brainwash yourself.

    19. Re:Good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....said the MindlessAutomata.

    20. Re:Good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You mean "useless" people that are the foundation for every economy?

      He went through *boot camp.* He dealt with useless people who had to be taught to wash their own ass holes.

    21. Re:Good idea. by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      Having gone through Boot Camp myself (Not in China mind you) I highly recommend it as a means of turning useless people into productive citizens.

      Of course, having gone through boot camp, you'll never know for sure if that's really what you think, or if that's what they told you to think ;)

      At my boot camp, they drilled into my head the idea that boot camps don't work. I now believe this notion only to the extent that it is false.

    22. Re:Good idea. by lordmetroid · · Score: 1

      Usually those brainwashings doesn't make people kill other people.

    23. Re:Good idea. by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      I thought we were discussing boot camps!

      Even so, Colin Powell, John McCain, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, JFK, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry would disagree.

      Regardless of your opinion of their politics, you can say they made something of their lives.

    24. Re:Good idea. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Having gone through Boot Camp, I only learned how being too smart can become a problem for you. Be dumb, be clumsy and your life is a lot easier.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:Good idea. by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Fsck you and the white mule you rode in on.

      People should learn their place as productive units in the larger social machine.

      Another brick in the wall, eh?
      No thanks. My social contract with your 'social machine' is really simple:
      Leave me alone, and I'll leave you alone.

      But then again, I may just be an anti-social psychopath.

      Because after all, the group comes before the individual doesn't it.

      No.
      A group is a collection of individuals.
      The individual comes first, as there would be no groups without the individual.
      Individuals can exist without groups.

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    26. Re:Good idea. by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      that military style training aimed at developing self-discipline

      Military training may well promote self-discipline, but it doesn't encourage free thinking, by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, since World War II, when they discovered that soldiers deliberately aim away from other people (even "enemies") whilst shooting, much army training has been devoted to dehumanising people and their enemies so that avoidance won't happen.

    27. Re:Good idea. by Mauzl · · Score: 1

      That is, until someone says his activation keyword.

    28. Re:Good idea. by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      "Productive" in the meaning of being a well-drilled slave that works hard for others, and asks for next to nothing in return?

      Or "productive" as in "Makes his own dreams become reality."?

      I doubt that boot camp is anything but dream and freedom crushing.
      It's closer to what used to stand above the entry of KZs: "Arbeit macht frei!"
      Go ahead and translate it.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    29. Re:Good idea. by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      So now you equate boot-camp trainees to ****Holocaust victims?***

      Get some perspective man!

       

    30. Re:Good idea. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      In his defense history is fucking littered with examples of just that.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    31. Re:Good idea. by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      It is, but it's done with informed consent. They advertise that they break people down and build them up and people agree to have that done to them. That's the only reason it's even slightly permissible.

    32. Re:Good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't get self-discipline in the military. By definition, self-discipline comes from self. Other people can help you to see the benefits of self-discipline, which should encourage you to adopt it. But following orders in a military chain-of-command is not self-discipline. The only self-discipline you'll find in boot camp is the disciplining of yourself to give up rational, critical thought and obey somebody else without explanation. Count me out.

  16. Send them all to Eastern Turkestan by oldhack · · Score: 1

    Let the Han kids and the Uighur kids duke it out on some deserted corner of Xinjiang. That'll teach them. Maybe they'll even come with some ideas to help their parents sort things out.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  17. More of a health issue.... by hengdi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most students that I teach in China (18-22) can't afford the computer required, so they play WOW and CS at their Internet bar. These places are usually dark, dingy and full of second-hand cigarette smoke. They make some of my teenage hacker basements look positively healthy. So I think it's not that the parents are really worried about the length of time spent playing, it's the conditions they are played under.

  18. Mod up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Children might take drugs without their parents' knowledge, but never excessive food. Whether a morbidly fat kid has become subject to a debilitating and horrible situation is debatable, but if the answer is "yes", then parents should take a lot of supervisory blame.

    1. Re:Mod up by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is a difference between excessive to one person and excessive to another. I know plenty of people who don't get very much activity, eat things loaded in sugar and fat, yet are incredibly skinny and healthy looking. I know other people who exercise a ton, eat extremely healthy food choices, yet are very, very large. There are some reasons for obesity that go way beyond just what you eat. Some bodies have a natural tendency to be large, others have a natural tendency to be very skinny. You should not punish parents for something they can't really control.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Mod up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Children might take drugs without their parents' knowledge, but never excessive food.

      Not true. I was a fat teenager simply because I ate too many sweets at school - all of which came from my pocket money, friends' generosity, etc. My parents had no idea how it was happening, and fed me healthy meals and encouraged exercise, as they had always done. Not surprisingly, when I finished school, I quickly lost all of that weight. Having said that, I was never (morbidly) obese, and I do agree that it would be extremely difficult to become obese without "assistance" from your parents (any responsible parent would step up their response as their child's weight ballooned).

    3. Re:Mod up by Dantu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know plenty of people who don't get very much activity, eat things loaded in sugar and fat, yet are incredibly skinny and healthy looking. I know other people who exercise a ton, eat extremely healthy food choices, yet are very, very large. There are some reasons for obesity that go way beyond just what you eat....

      Fair enough - but you seem to be making a classic mistake. It's not so much what you eat, but how much of it, that determines your weight. Now, as someone who has to work to control his weight - yes, I envy my fiance, who can eat whatever he wants. But the difference isn't that he can magically eat way more than I can - it's that his appetite is more easily sated. Sure there are also metabolism differences, but in reality a very obese person is almost certain to be burning more calories than a thin person at a similar level of physical activity, because all that fat takes energy just to keep alive, and more still to move around.

      Where I'm going with this is: sure, life isn't fair. It's more difficult to control eating for some than for others - but at the end of the day what you eat is a conscious choice. Helping teach, encourage, and in some cases force (depending on age, we "force" young kids to do everything) people to eat in a way that will lead to a healthier life can be justified.

    4. Re:Mod up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can attest to this. I've actually met a number of people, especially girls who fit in the 'seriously overweight' looking category. But the funny thing is about half of them are capable of biking/jogging/etc longer than me. The downsides however are a generally lower social image of them, limited selection of comfortable transportation, and higher chance of joint injury. (Bad knees and wrist injuries seem to be most common, usually from falls. Oftentimes from tumbles that leave skinnier people sore for a couple of days.)

      YMMV obviously.

    5. Re:Mod up by plastbox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Stop it! Stop justifying obesity by giving fatties excuses! The general public is dumb enough to actually be grossly overweight in the first place, do you really think they need to repeatedly hear people say things like "well, some lucky bastards are just born with a high metabolism!", "Being large is beautiful!", "Beauty comes form the inside, there is nothing wrong with beeing plus sized"?

      Fact is, you CAN'T gain weight if you put less energy into your system than you expend! Finding an online basal metabolic rate calculator isn't very hard either. Now, if you can't be arsed to learn anything about how your body works, spend 5 minutes with Google to find a BMR calculator and pay attention to how much you actually eat... Live a life unable to go to the beach, make people uncomfortable when you undress at the beach, get diabetes type 2 and die of heart complications at age 40.

      Just don't force that on your children. If you do, you should be reported for child abuse.

      On a somewhat related note.. I live in Norway and I can safely say that even though we are nowhere near USA level of crazy obesity, things are starting to change here as well. 7-8 years ago when I was in highschool, there were <5 overweight people in my entire school of ~300 students. These days, nearly everyone I see between age 15-19 is at least 5-10kg overweight. Hell, even the ones who happen to eat as much as they burn still look out of shape with girls sporting untrained thin thighs and flabby asses and the guys possessing the same level of upper body strength as my little sister! The exceptions are the morbidly obese and the sickly skinny, who seem to make up about the same percentage of the population now as the "10kg too much"-portion did a few years ago. Not "super size me" by any means, but still that is a lot different than a few years back!

    6. Re:Mod up by plastbox · · Score: 1

      Damnit, I meant "..unable to walk up a flight of stairs or sit comfortably on any bus/airplane/train not tailored to your weightclass"

    7. Re:Mod up by Sobrique · · Score: 3, Informative

      Justifying being unhealthy? No. Being overweight is a symptom of an underlying problem - the problem is quite simply that you cannot regulate calorific intake/outgoing as well as a 'normal' person. That's not an excuse, it's a fact. It is down to the people who are overweight to recognise it as such, and deal with it - much like someone who is diabetic needs to take on board and pay attention to their nutrition and need to have insulin daily for the rest of their life.
      Recognise the problem - that people who are overweight are NEVER doing it deliberately. They're doing it because in this day and age where 'being hungry' is practically impossible, their self regulatory mechanism doesn't work as well.
      So they _have_ to pay attention - every day - to how much they're consuming, how much they're using - you say it's easy to find a BMR? Sure, if you know that's specifically what you need to be looking at - oh, and if you accept that you are 'average' in that sense, which ... oh wait, if you were 'average' you _wouldn't_ be overweight.
      And at the same time you'll find a hell of a lot of utter tripe, crap and hogwash about 'diet programs' from assholes who declare it 'easy - just eat less pie, fatty'. Or maybe tell you about the 12 week cabbage soup program or something. And the whole thing is utter lies, because a diet is _never_ a short term thing - it's what you eat every day for the rest of your life.
      People who are overweight are people who, for whatever reason, have trouble self regulating their calorific intake. There is a lot of 'facts' published about this, that, and the other, and there is a lot of noise in the signal, simply because ... well, it's big business. What is not needed is 'lolfatties' prejudice and the kind of crap from people who find it easy - some people can't swim or ride a bike, but I guarantee that they _wouldn't_ have done so, if every time they tried someone breezed past, showing off, and giving them a shove in the process.
      It's a prejudice, much like any other. People don't have to 'justify' why they're diabetic. People shouldn't have to 'justify' why they are overweight. It's a metabolic problem, it's one that is actually relatively straightforward to fix, but it requires a lifetime commitment - both to understanding what's necessary, and then actually implementing it. Lets lose the bullshit, and accept that our society is broken, and get on with fixing it.

    8. Re:Mod up by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      While some people have a slower metabolism than others, you can't buck the laws of physics. If you're getting fat you're eating too much for you.

      Also I wouldn't regard self-reportred claims of how much people eat as being particularly reliable

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    9. Re:Mod up by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 3, Informative

      Often the simple solutions don't work, either, which is why people need to be better educated about how the whole system works.

      Most people that are obese (or even just overweight) will try, before anything else, to reduce their intake. For many (if not most) people, while this might have an initial effect of dropping a couple of pounds, it usually has the reverse effect in the long term of causing the body to store more fat, thinking that the food has gone away.

      People need to spread the same food out a bit more and eat more times during the day, and they need to change the types of foods they eat so they are taking in a healthier diet. Usually this can all be done without reducing the amount of food a person is eating, and they will lose weight, because the body feels that food is more plentiful (since they're eating say 5-7 times a day instead of 3), and the food is better for them, making them feel better and possibly increasing their activity level.

      Some of the heaviest people I've known in my life eat one or two meals a day. My father lost 50+ pounds by going from eating dinner and possibly a snack before dinner to eating 5 times a day (in fact eating more food, but also healthier food), and eventually increasing his activity level and taking daily walks (which of course increased in distance as he lost more weight).

      The main point with dieting is finding a program based on resetting your system to process food properly and training yourself for the long term to eat right, with a clear path from weight loss to weight maintenance. If a diet doesn't include a method to stop losing weight (without regaining), then it's not a real solution. There are also a number of misconceptions about any popular diet plan, and people can easily go down the wrong path by following those misconceptions. The most obvious and popular of these is the Atkins plan, which most people use as an excuse to go out and eat fatty meats all day every day for a month or two and watch the weight 'miraculously' disappear, only to find that they can't keep the weight off when they quit, and it doesn't work as well when they do it again. The actual plan, on the other hand, includes a lot of vegetables and pushes towards adding carbs back into the diet slowly, monitoring the effect the carbs have on your weight, and coming to a level of carb intake that makes sense for your activity levels (and can be maintained, healthily, throughout your life).

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    10. Re:Mod up by DrLang21 · · Score: 1

      Overweight is a minor issue, and I'm not entirely convinced that our definition of overweight is even appropriate. It's obesity that's the real problem. When you approach obesity, your biological processes start to get screwed up.

      The fact is that if you're truly eating right, you're going to be eating a crap load of food, no matter who you are. The difference is in the content of that food. People just need to stop snacking (an extremely common cause of large amounts of uncounted calories) and stop eating crap. Just because those kids look skinny, doesn't mean they're healthy. Eat whole grain breads, brown rice, beans, and for god's sake eat lots of vegetables. It's sad that even our school lunches are indirectly required by the government to be crap. We don't need to eat meat every day. McDonald's food is killing us, and we're to blame for it because we're buying it.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    11. Re:Mod up by DrLang21 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm no longer convinced that it's about how much you eat, but rather what you eat. You can feast on carrots, green beans, peppers, and broccoli all day and I would put money down that you won't gain weight from it. Our society is overloaded with high calorie, low nutrition snack foods and deep fried dinners. The idea that you can eat what ever you want so long as you burn it off is just plain misleading. Yes you can go to McDonalds and not fall off the bandwagon. But if you're going to McDonalds every week, or several times a week, there's no way that any normal person, no matter what their metabolism is, is going to be able to just "burn it off".

      Just a note. I actually do hit up the McDonalds drive thru roughly once a week when I don't get a chance to take a lunch to work. I order a salad, which are actually quite good and filling.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    12. Re:Mod up by brkello · · Score: 1

      No, not really. Unlike being gay or being born with a skin color, being fat is a choice. Most people don't want to be it, but then they don't want to take the steps to avoid it either. Not only is it less attractive, it is less healthy. So I don't think it is good as a society to encourage people to be fat (I am talking about the "big is beautiful" crowd).

      Furthermore, it is as simple as burning more calories than you consume. People have trouble because they are lazy. Instead of buying healthy foods and cooking they go get fast food or go to restaurants. They pay no attention to what they eat and they get very little physical activity.

      Now I am not saying you need to look like a super model, that isn't realistic. But only in rare cases is there an excuse to be overweight. Those small number of medical issues aside, people are way too fat. The number of medical issues have not gone up. The convenience of food that is bad for you has.

      So stop making excuses. Find out how many calories a person of your sex/height should be consuming, eliminate fast food, exercise AT LEAST 3 days a week (the more the better), eat healthy foods (uncooked veggies, fruit, oatmeal, whole grain breads, etc). Don't diet, change your lifestyle. You will be happier and healthier because of it.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    13. Re:Mod up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Fact is, you CAN'T gain weight if you put less energy into your system than you expend!'

      Sure, but there are perameters that change how much energy you expend. If your blood insulin is higher (from genetics, more frequent eating, or more carbohydrate in your diet) you'll "take in" more energy. Lower insulin encourages greater wastage of calories, which is how you can see many young people with "fast metabolisms" eat 3000 calories/day on occasion, be sedentary, and not be fat.

      The basic weight loss mantra is based on a misinterpretation of the second law of thermodynamics. The second law, in this situation, is best stated like this: "Difference in weight = intake - energy expended (bodily processes + exercise)." The misinterpretation comes in how those variables treated - the energy expended depends on intake. The greater the intake, the greater the wastage.

      It's really not as simple as "Find your BMR, and move your fat ass the appropriate amount!" I'm sure caloric restriction works for somebody, but not for those of us whose obesity results from elevated blood insulin and increased insulin resistance (almost like an 'insulin tolerance'). The only* hope for myself and others with this issue is carbohydrate-restriction, barring the development of drugs to lower insulin resistance.

      *: Well, it's probably the only pragmatic one. I can't imagine many people would be interested in Ramadan-style fasting, which also improves insulin resistance. Would link the study, but I've gotta run.

    14. Re:Mod up by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      Being overweight is as much a choice as being diabetic. It isn't. That doesn't mean it's an excuse - when you're diabetic you will make yourself ill if you don't take in hand your diet, and control insulin levels. Same's true of being overweight.
      But to say 'it's just an excuse, all fat people are lazy' carries with it the arrogance of someone who's never really had a problem with it. More importantly, regardless of that stupid prejudice, it doesn't actually help - beat someone up for being lazy/overweight, and how motivated do you think they're going to be to sort it out? It's a health problem, and it's a societal problem. It's one that needs sorting, and it needs sorting with something a little more than 'omg you're just lazy and eat too much, fix that and you'll be fine'. Because it _isn't_ that trivial.
      Even your 'find how many calories you should be consuming' overtrivialises it - How many calories should I be consuming? Well, I can guesstimate based on the web, that it's 2500kcal a day for an adult male. If I use a BMR calculator, I get about that answer too... but I've actually gone to the trouble of a 'full medical' and measuring that, and it was about 150kcal/day lower.
      Which means... I could do exactly what you'd just suggested, and end up gaining weight at a rate of about a pound a month.
      That's kind of the point I was aiming at - you've just given well meaning advice to an overweight person, and you happen to also be wrong.

  19. Is this really news? by xhamulnazgul · · Score: 1

    This has been going on there for YEARS! I mean really just look at what a simple search returns on this subject.

    --
    Communism will never work. People LIKE to own things.
  20. Boot Camp Therapy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Boot Camp? But.. are Web Addicts only Mac Users?

  21. we don't need no.... by gandhi_2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...re-education camps.

    1. Re:we don't need no.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      greifer! leave them kids alone!

  22. So how do you tell the difference? by harryjohnston · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let's see ... the symptoms are depression, antisocial behavior, and slipping grades. Except perhaps for the last one, that sounds like any teenager I've ever met.

    1. Re:So how do you tell the difference? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's maybe only because the teenagers you met were geeks. Take a non-geek (who has a girlfriend) and he'll quality for all three.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  23. ambivalence by nixish · · Score: 1

    I am a bit ambivalent about this approach. On one hand, the Chinese government is trying to shape today's youth into something which will contribute to society. On the other, there could be unnecessary victims and they could end up screwed up and this approach might work in Creating a counter productive individual for society. I hope the good outweighs the bad but that will not be found out so soon.

    1. Re:ambivalence by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      On one hand, the Chinese government is trying to shape today's youth into something which will contribute to society

      ...And when has a "good member of society" like that ever really done anything good for society? Lets see, Thomas Edison only had a few months of traditional schooling, yet he became a very successful inventor and businessman. The history books are filled with people who didn't fit society's expectations and changed history for the better. On the other hand, there are comparatively very little people who followed society's instructions and really ended up benefiting society.

      Something tells me that the average internet "addicted" kid is going to be a lot better at some parts of computers than the person with many years of college education on computers. And that internet "addicted" kid could very well invent the next great thing in computers, where if they had been following society's instructions they would be making little more than a paycheck.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:ambivalence by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I have to find that study again, maybe someone else read it too...

      In a nutshell, it said that conformists stabilize a society and keep it together because their traditional thinking and behaviour makes the society as a whole more predictable, thus generally increasing stability, but the nonconformists are the ones that introduce change and movement onwards, and without them any society becomes stale and prone to being passed by history.

      Essentially you need both. Without stability, the society breaks apart and there is nowhere to move forwards to, because there is nobody who would follow the way. Without people thinking outside of the box there is no progress.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  24. better than ECT by euyis · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's much better than electroconvulsive therapy, which they have used.

  25. I don't think this is going to work... by Zakabog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really don't think this is going to work, I've been through boot camp (USMC), and once I went back to civilian life (I had a shoulder injury that prevented me from finishing the last week of training and then going on to serve.) I was pretty much the same person. The only difference is when I came out I had military training, I feel more calm in stressful situations than I did before, and I'm more confident in my fighting and survival abilities. I still play video games and browse the internet as much as I did before I joined the Marines. So if you go into boot camp as an internet addicted teenager you're going to come out as an internet addicted teenager, with military training. Unless they're sending them into the army right after they're not going to keep in that mindset, they're going to go back to the internet and their video games. Perhaps sending them to a summer camp where they have many activities to choose from would be a better idea. Hikes through the woods, swimming, sports, and being encourage to speak to other people and socialize would be good for these people. The boot camp seems like it would be too much like work for these kids and they would just resent it rather than enjoy it.

    1. Re:I don't think this is going to work... by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean you turn someone who is antisocial, depressed and angry into someone who is antisocial, depressed and angry with military training and self esteem.

      I think the Chinese will soon live in very interesting times.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:I don't think this is going to work... by turing_m · · Score: 1

      The boot camp seems like it would be too much like work for these kids and they would just resent it rather than enjoy it.

      The counter-strike players would probably enjoy it once they got fit. And the WoW players would enjoy digging holes and filling them back in again.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    3. Re:I don't think this is going to work... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you turn someone who is antisocial, depressed and angry into someone who is antisocial, depressed and angry with military training and self esteem.

      I think the Chinese will soon live in very interesting times.

      You may be on to something. However, I just want to note that for "emotional" depression (rather than clinical depression which is more complex) obtaining a decent level (neither too little nor too much) of self esteem usually reduces or eliminates the condition. Of course that doesn't undermine your main premise, an an antisocial and angry person who has self esteem is far more likely to act-out than a depressed, antisocial, and angry person.

  26. I'm a Web addict, but I'm not Chinese so... by macraig · · Score: 1

    ... where's my boot camp and interventionist therapy?

  27. Kind of cruel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Cause the girls will be getting exposed to WoW players. Even Dick Cheney would be reluctant to use that kind of torture.

  28. Addiction is never the disease, it's the symptom by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is, btw, also why DARE is pretty much a waste of time and taxpayer money. But that's not the topic now.

    What is "addiction"? Basically that the body (or mind) wants some stimulus that you handed him for a long time. Why does it want it? Because the stimulus was/is positive and not getting it is subjectively negative.

    Which leads to the crucial question: Why did you start taking/using it in the first place? It's not like someone goes "Hey, it's Tuesday, it's colder than outside, let's start pumping heroin up our veins!" That's not how it works. Hell, by now pretty much everyone knows that addictive substances and behaviour are, in the long run, bad for you. Do you think anyone who started pushing thought H is "not really so bad"?

    Drugs are a last resort means for people who have no other way to get a positive stimulus to their system. The worse they're off, the worse the drug they'll be willing to use. Let's be honest here, anyone here pushing H? Anyone? Somehow, I doubt it. Maybe we have a few ex addicts here, in that case the question to you: Were you as "well off" back then as you're now?

    China, with its one-child policy, imposed an insane pressure on its youth. Parents only have one child to carry on their legacy, and that child has to PERFORM! Add a confucianist ideal and a booming market where anyone "smart working hard" can become rich and important, and you'll notice that not even a "western" only child can possible imagine what the pressure is like.

    So, to make a long story short, those "boot camps" (and similar programs all over the planet, albeit maybe not as brutal) will not accomplish anything. Worst case they'll make it worse. They try to cure the symptom, but that won't solve the underlying problem. Addiction is never the problem itself. Take away an addict's "substance" but fail to solve the problem behind it and he'll just search for something new.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  29. Re:The most devestating technique in their arsenal by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    So? We've all seen female Elves nak... Oh, you mean real girls!

    They do exist?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  30. Re:The most devestating technique in their arsenal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chinese parents are better off having boys than girls, so there aren't enough girls. Maybe that's part of the problem.

  31. Where's Billy Mays when you need his advice? by rts008 · · Score: 1

    What the military does is most certainly brainwashing.

    Then maybe they need a better detergent, or something.
    My brain came out of bootcamp (1978) no cleaner than it was before...probably grungier!

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  32. Every few years another bogeyman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "A large number of Chinese parents are finding their teenagers to be exhibiting such psychological symptoms as depression, antisocial behavior, and slipping grades."

    Sounds like my kids and they don't spend more than 5 mins thinking about anything let alone the internet!

    This BS sounds like the section in the "Decline and Fall" where the kids into metal get shipped of to "metal-detox" camps to learn to love Jesus and let go of this awful music that is leading them to "depression, antisocial behavior, and slipping grades".

    Didn't Hypocrites pre-BC, write similar stuff, stating kids were being tricked into not paying attention and not working, by their idols at the time?

  33. It's only natural by khchung · · Score: 1

    I not sure if parent post think this is good or bad, but to put it simply, I dealt with enough a**holes during the day while working, if there is a way for me to keep in touch with my friends without dealing with any more a**holes, sign me up.

    50 years ago, you practically cannot interact with your friends without at least N-1 of you "going out", even if it is just next door. So unless you want to be left out, you have to "go out" most of the time.

    20 years ago, you can somewhat keep in touch with most of your friends using the phone, so the need to "go out" becomes less.

    Now, not only can you chat (voice/text) with all your friends together, you also can have a lot of interactions online, which used to be only possible by getting together (e.g. game of poker, risk, etc). So the need to have N-1 people "go out" just to get together is nearly nil. Wow, no surprise the generation that most used to interact online do not feel the need to physically go out at all.

    Criticizing them for not "going out" is the same as a bat criticizing an owl for not interacting with the environment because the owl is no emitting sonar beeps. The owl has vision sees the environment in a way the bat cannot comprehend.

    In the same way, the newer generation is interacting and "going out" online, unfortunately some older generation who hardly grasp email is unable to comprehend the level of interaction going on and assume the kid is "hiding himself".

    Trying to cut the kid off the net to make him "go out" will be as useful as blinding the owl to get it to use sonar like a bat. It's not going to work. You just got to accept the fact the kids growing up now will interact with friends differently than you did.

    --
    Oliver.
    1. Re:It's only natural by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      I don't see it as good or bad to be honest. The problem I do see, is that people will approach this issue the wrong way. This is simply a new way in the socialization trends, and a 'behavior' to be corrected. This is that whole 'hermitish' thing that I suppose some people think. On the other hand, there are still other development skills going on and all the rest. Rather then something that should be expanded upon as something normal, an individual who feels the need to connect with a person they don't know or develop relationships and friendships like this is fine in my book.

      New technologies bring new fears. New fears, bring new panics. Give me a crystal ball, and I'd be a millionaire too.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  34. And how useful is bootcamp? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

    This notion of comparing teens who use the Internet, to teens who spend their time in gyms, going out in public all day chatting to people, is a false dichotomy. Consider the majority of teens who, before the Internet, simply stayed at home, and rarely socialised outside of schooltime. Did we have boot camps for them?

    The fact that WoW is not "useful" is beside the point. It's meant to be a leisure activity.

    And how useful is bootcamp, btw, for someone who has no interest in joining the army? How will having "Drill sergeants shout orders" at them improve their social skills for real life? How much opportunity will there be to practice their mathematics, when they're getting woken up at 6.20am to dress up in uniforms and march around, and learn how to fight?

    Shooting things in a game is bad, but learning to kill people for real is acceptable?

    How useful is posting to Slashdot? Shall we off you to boot camp?

    1. Re:And how useful is bootcamp? by Dr.+Impossible+II · · Score: 1

      The fact that WoW is not "useful" is beside the point. It's meant to be a leisure activity.

      Exactly, so why try to promote it as some kind of subsitute for real life?

      And how useful is bootcamp, btw, for someone who has no interest in joining the army? How will having "Drill sergeants shout orders" at them improve their social skills for real life? How much opportunity will there be to practice their mathematics, when they're getting woken up at 6.20am to dress up in uniforms and march around, and learn how to fight?

      Did I say anything about the bootcamp?

      Shooting things in a game is bad, but learning to kill people for real is acceptable?

      Did I say shooting things in a game is bad? And yes, learning to kill people is 100% acceptable. Why wouldn't it be?

  35. Okay, so the kids get martial arts training... by Mewtwo · · Score: 1

    ...so now when they get back home, and the parent tries to pull them off the internet (or tell the kids to do/not to do anything), the kids are now eqiupped with the skills to kick the parent's ass. Great thinking!

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 SU CK IT MP AA
    1. Re:Okay, so the kids get martial arts training... by brkello · · Score: 1

      And the parents are then equipped to kick them out of the house so they have to earn a living to survive.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
  36. Do they get a Mac Book Pro to run Boot Camp? by vaporland · · Score: 1

    Obviously, socialism does have its benefits, as long as they don't force them to use Vista.

    --
    Ask Me About... The 80's!
  37. Re:Addiction is never the disease, it's the sympto by brkello · · Score: 1

    I don't agree. A family I know had two kids. One of them got addicted to video games. The one who didn't went to work at a highly respected company and is quite successful. The one who played games dropped out of school and moved back in with his parents. This guy is a hell of a lot smarter than me, so it isn't some intelligence issue. They grew up in the same environment, had the same opportunities, yet have vastly different lives. There were no bad conditions in his life to force him in to addiction. Games are fun. If you play a lot, you can get really good and people will look up to you. That feels good. But at the end of the day, it doesn't pay the bills. If you can get the kids away from the Internet, it might break the cycle. They might get over their social fears and realize that the real world is more interesting and has more meaningful rewards.

    You like to pass these off as ineffective, but I bet you it actually does help a lot of people. They might enjoy the martial arts they learn and keep that up. They might realize that they do spend too much time playing games and forge friendships that mean they will get out more. Will it work for everyone? Of course not. But to say it won't accomplish anything is talking out your ass.

    --
    Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
  38. internet addiction is B.S. by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

    I could be considered as much an internet junky as anyone and I can tell you it's bullshit... after 6 years in IT I needed a break and went for the real thing. I joined the Marine Corps and went off to boot camp. 3 months and I didn't shake, shiver, flip out, or have a break down. People have some crazy shit in their heads. Whatever; go on thinking you need to be born again. Or just walk away from the computer. I'm back doing the system administrator thing now and just as happy in front of the computer; I do take time out to go outside and do some camping, hiking, or even just walking trails in the park for a few hours.

  39. Re:Addiction is never the disease, it's the sympto by winwar · · Score: 1

    "What is "addiction"? Basically that the body (or mind) wants some stimulus that you handed him for a long time."

    Incorrect.

    You just described dependence. Dependence is NOT addiction. Anything that alters brain chemistry can conceivably lead to dependence (meds, activities, etc.)

    "Why does it want it? Because the stimulus was/is positive and not getting it is subjectively negative."

    If you are dependent on a substance you will get withdrawal symptons. Perfectly normal. Does not indicate addiction.

  40. No (intelligent) comment to make by kheldan · · Score: 1

    I wish I had an intelligent comment to make on a story like this.. but this, and things like it, piss me off so much that I get virutally incoherent. China has NO concept of human rights.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  41. Re:Addiction is never the disease, it's the sympto by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

    D.A.R.E. is basically the reason I started experimenting with drugs. Been having a damn good time too! Thanks D.A.R.E.!!

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  42. many years in China, Korea, Japan by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Heres a and article about Korea. 60 Minutes or Dateline ran a story on these.

  43. Re:Addiction is never the disease, it's the sympto by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    Bingo. People do hard drugs because they are miserable, not the other way around. If you treat the cause and help people get their lives on track, help find new activities, the'll quit drugs on their own as their lives won't be so miserable and they won't need something to dull the pain. It's why I tell anybody considering drinking or using drugs for the first time: "NEVER use substances to dull pain."

  44. Re:Addiction is never the disease, it's the sympto by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    Incarcerating people without due process and brainwashing, yes, brainwashing them into thinking and behaving in a different manner is NEVER beneficial in any country in any form, ever. It's rape of the mind and until you've experienced it, you'll never know quite how painful it is when you realize what they did. Even if you "behave" better afterward, it's not really you. If you want to help people, *convince* them to change or choose other paths of their own volition but don't force them. In the long run it never works.

  45. Re:Addiction is never the disease, it's the sympto by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    Mark my words. In time, you will hear *horrible* stories out of these places in China. The boot camps in the states were bad enough to inspire congressional hearings... I can hardly imagine what these kids will have to go through and I guarantee it won't be what they advertise.

  46. No internet :O by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And some called waterboarding torture, but in the face of this....

  47. Please take your obvious body issues and go home. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your emotional outburst here makes me suspect that you have serious body image issues. Go talk to someone about it. Off the Internet.

  48. typical inmate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Typical inmate:

    ¦-(