New York State Testing Emergency Alerts Over Gaming Networks

An anonymous reader writes "Gamers are used to confronting invading terrorists, nuclear attacks, and natural calamities—in virtual form. But those living in New York State could soon receive warnings about real emergencies through their favorite video console. State authorities are testing a plan that would see the Emergency Management Office issue alerts over online gaming networks in addition to regular channels."

Comments

Re:Fucking moronic

[Facegarden]

It's a fucking gaming network. People are focused on playing the game, not on your emergency announcement. Unless you have a way to literally stop the game (pissing anyone off that isn't affected by the alert) you're wasting your time sending the message.

I'm sick and tired of these idiotic experiments by business people who don't understand the technology and therefore can't work out how asinine what they're suggesting really is. Then between 6 months and 2 years later, when they do have a few people hooked and relying on their ill advised service, they decide the experiment failed and pulled the plug. Fucking tossers.

Uhh... really? It's an *EMERGENCY*. I think when someone tries to go attack New York again, people will be willing to miss a few headshots to get the best possible warning they can. Its not like these announcements are sent out often.
At least, in my head, these are rare occurrences on the scale of Katrina and 9/11 that people would be notified. I think once a year if someone interrupts my game to say "Hey, we're being attacked by god/mormons/terrorists/etc, try not to die", I'll forgive them for ruining my game.

Or are you so insanely entrenched in your game that you'd rather die than be notified of an emergency?
-Taylor

Re:Children are likely to get confused

[Blakey Rat]

Yeah, because it's unthinkable that an adult might play video games, right? Sheesh. I never thought I'd see the "video games are only for kids" sentiment here on Slashdot of all places.

Anyway, let's say an alert pops up that the kid "becomes confused" and ignores it. So what? If the system wasn't in place, they would never have seen the alert, and so the kid's no worse off. On the other hand, if he's the rare kid who doesn't "become confused" by it, it might just save his life.

So I don't really know what you're griping about here.

Re:Fucking moronic

[BobMcD]

Uhh... really? It's an *EMERGENCY*. I think when someone tries to go attack New York again, people will be willing to miss a few headshots to get the best possible warning they can.

Okay first, no one has ever 'attacked New York'. I don't even remember the English doing so during the Revolutionary War, though I'd be generous enough to grant you that. There has not since been a military threat to the entire population of that entire state. Period.

Second, the 9/11 events were a complete surprise. No warning would have done anyone a bit of good. The 'next terrorist attack' will almost certainly be the exact same sort of thing.

Third, how many of the occupants of World Trade I and II were on the damn xbox that morning anyway?

At least, in my head, these are rare occurrences on the scale of Katrina and 9/11 that people would be notified.

For 9/11, see above. Can't alert a surprise attack until it is far too late.

Katrina, on the other hand, was DECIDEDLY NOT a surprise. People had days and days of warning. They were also somewhat used to that sort of thing. It isn't as if additional notification would have changed the impact of the storm. Unless that information is from the future, and contains how surprisingly bad a particular storm will be, it would simply get filed alongside the other twenty-some-odd storms that hit that area per year.