I have the original CE degree, so I am quailified. CE = Civil Engineering, as in, the first, non-military engineering degree from which all others derive. I've put it to good use as a UNIX sys admin. That said, I usually just leave the BCE on my resume without explination, and fess up only if I am asked - "So you have a Bachelor of Computer Engineering." "Actually..."
I'm not too convinced that action toys alone will lead to violent behavior. A friend of mine grew up Amish, where there is no tech or 'dangerous toys'. The Amish are strict pacifists. However, without being taught or influenced to do so, give an Amish boy a stick and he will turn it into a weapon (then get switched for doing so). Cops and robbers, cowboys and indians are normal for little boys, which I wouldn't classify as violent. A chainsaw to the head - now that is violent. What I think is 'dirty' about these toys is the marketing: "Hey kids - here's the action figure, now go plan that 'M' rated game!" I have worked in marketing and this is diliberate (see also movie marketing).
Another key to understanding why violent games for kids is bad is this: whatever we spend time doing influences us. Spend a week playing Doom, then contemplate on the nature of life. Spend a different week in Paris with your loved one, then see what your outlook on life is like. Read slashdot all week and your brain turns to... We can influence ourselves and others just by what we choose to do. This influence feeds us to do more of the same, and even think about things differently. For kids, this is 10x as true. But they don't 'feed' themselves - their parents do. Or the TV or computer or... Most parents don't think this way, but that is a parent's job: feed the kids and clean up their s--t. That's how it all starts, and that's how it should continue - with ideas, activities, and morals.
As for the reasearch, you can try this:
1) Play Quake, Diablo, (_____) for 6 hours.
2) Stop immediately when 6 hours is done.
3) Get up and write a love poem to your amore.
4) Post it here, because he/she certainly won't want to see it and we could use a good laugh.
You may also want to look at the Surgeon General's Report on Youth Violence. Plenty of references and research if you really want to dig.
I was listening to Moody radio when a professor of history was being interviewed. He was asked, what event in history can be likened to these events. His response was not Pearl Harbor, but the assassination of Lincoln, for the following reasons:
Lincoln's assassination was part of a coordinated effort to kill Lincoln, Johnson, and Seward (sec of state). The attack on Johnson was aborted, and Seward survived a slash to the throat.
Terrorist cooridination are two words that don't belong together.
Lincoln's assassination was unprecidented and a complete shock. Although there have been terrorist attacks on the US and abroad, there has never been anything of this magnitute.
I believe this will dwarf Pearl Harbor in terms of loss of life (2403 vs 50,000+) and long term impact (WWII vs. ??) The ideological, economic, political impact of this attack will take years to play out. I don't think WWIII is ineveitable, but the chages that are effected will be more wide spread than war. Just think of what has happened in just a few hours. The first total grounding of all air. Closure of borders. Stop of financial markets. Evacuation of every government and major building in the US. Even small details speak volumes - Mayor Gulianii, concerning the evacuation of NYC: "Everyone south of Canal Street WALK."
I'm not sure why this has been overlooked in the media, but the combined occupancy of both towers is 1/2 million. This is according to the architect of the buildings in a
Jerusalem Post interview . I hope the estimates of 50,000 casualties hold up.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh, excuse me...
..."
I have the original CE degree, so I am quailified. CE = Civil Engineering, as in, the first, non-military engineering degree from which all others derive. I've put it to good use as a UNIX sys admin. That said, I usually just leave the BCE on my resume without explination, and fess up only if I am asked - "So you have a Bachelor of Computer Engineering." "Actually
I'm not too convinced that action toys alone will lead to violent behavior. A friend of mine grew up Amish, where there is no tech or 'dangerous toys'. The Amish are strict pacifists. However, without being taught or influenced to do so, give an Amish boy a stick and he will turn it into a weapon (then get switched for doing so). Cops and robbers, cowboys and indians are normal for little boys, which I wouldn't classify as violent. A chainsaw to the head - now that is violent. What I think is 'dirty' about these toys is the marketing: "Hey kids - here's the action figure, now go plan that 'M' rated game!" I have worked in marketing and this is diliberate (see also movie marketing).
Another key to understanding why violent games for kids is bad is this: whatever we spend time doing influences us. Spend a week playing Doom, then contemplate on the nature of life. Spend a different week in Paris with your loved one, then see what your outlook on life is like. Read slashdot all week and your brain turns to ... We can influence ourselves and others just by what we choose to do. This influence feeds us to do more of the same, and even think about things differently. For kids, this is 10x as true. But they don't 'feed' themselves - their parents do. Or the TV or computer or ... Most parents don't think this way, but that is a parent's job: feed the kids and clean up their s--t. That's how it all starts, and that's how it should continue - with ideas, activities, and morals.
As for the reasearch, you can try this:
1) Play Quake, Diablo, (_____) for 6 hours.
2) Stop immediately when 6 hours is done.
3) Get up and write a love poem to your amore.
4) Post it here, because he/she certainly won't want to see it and we could use a good laugh.
You may also want to look at the Surgeon General's Report on Youth Violence. Plenty of references and research if you really want to dig.
I'm not sure why this has been overlooked in the media, but the combined occupancy of both towers is 1/2 million. This is according to the architect of the buildings in a Jerusalem Post interview . I hope the estimates of 50,000 casualties hold up.