The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

[BugI02]

Please explain how using a mouse and keyboard or a controller translates to being able to better use a gun. I suppose these kids all know how to use swords like Samurai as well now.

There is absolutely no similarity between sitting on your ass staring at a screen and running around with a gun killing people.

Maybe you should run the google search 'attacks with samurai sword' before you display such certainty that gameworld will not overflow into realworld. If random murder is just 'good clean fun' fit for entertainment, what will you do when 'Grand Theft Pedophile' or 'The Grooming Game' comes out. Please feel free to not answer the question with some kind of ridicule about future crime, but at heart the question is where do we draw the line on perversity as entertainment

It's not whether games make you a better swordsman, it's whether they abrade the layers of civilization meant to keep you from solving your problems with a weapon. Why do we teach rigorous safe gun handling and respect for the capabilities of the weapons? Why is personal honor and restraint such a large part of most (worthwhile) teaching of martial arts? Is it because we want to strangle any idea that a weapon be used for any other purpose than defense of oneself and innocent others and even then as a last resort? And is it possible wholesale killing positioned as revenge or entertainment weakens those lessons?

 

[KLB]

Maybe you should run the google search 'attacks with samurai sword' before you display such certainty that gameworld will not overflow into realworld. If random murder is just 'good clean fun' fit for entertainment, what will you do when 'Grand Theft Pedophile' or 'The Grooming Game' comes out. Please feel free to not answer the question with some kind of ridicule about future crime, but at heart the question is where do we draw the line on perversity as entertainment

It's not whether games make you a better swordsman, it's whether they abrade the layers of civilization meant to keep you from solving your problems with a weapon. Why do we teach rigorous safe gun handling and respect for the capabilities of the weapons? Why is personal honor and restraint such a large part of most (worthwhile) teaching of martial arts? Is it because we want to strangle any idea that a weapon be used for any other purpose than defense of oneself and innocent others and even then as a last resort? And is it possible wholesale killing positioned as revenge or entertainment weakens those lessons?

There was never a time in human history when some people have not been violent. Whether it is with a gun, sword, hammer, stick.....

If your assertion is correct, then the frequency of violent crime should be going up. Do you have some statistics that show that?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I'm not one to use the phrase "wrong side of history" often...

... but...

You might want to approach this from a facts/research angle instead of the feelings angle.

You feel games could contribute to people acting out, but there's no data to show that.

We can always include other forms of media and entertainment... but then you'd lose the "bash the youngsters" thing.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

CNN has just hired John Harwood as their White House correspondent.

 

[BugI02]

https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/explorer/national/united-states/shr
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Crime Data Explorer

Go ahead; explore 'Victim Circumstance' where 'arguments' are the largest count of any categorizable information, or 'Murder Victims by Weapon' where edged weapons are #2 (after firearms) or 'Victim's Relationship to the Offender' where
'acquaintance, stranger and other-known to victim' are the top three categorizations

Would you conclude that random violence is on the upswing?

 

[VulpesForge]

I'm not one to use the phrase "wrong side of history" often...

... but...

You might want to approach this from a facts/research angle instead of the feelings angle.

You feel games could contribute to people acting out, but there's no data to show that.

We can always include other forms of media and entertainment... but then you'd lose the "bash the youngsters" thing.

Most data actually shows that violence in video games or violent video games in general are cathartic. (meaning it actually does the opposite and relieves stress tension etc instead of causing a buildup of undue stress that can't be relieved except through physical means)

 

[PaulF]

So, are you saying that simulation has no real world value as training?

And if not, what are first person shooter games simulating? If the quote in the link is accurate, he's not saying the games cause the violence, it just hones the skillset

A first-person shooter, mechanically, trains the player to locate and identify targets (usually by aligning a pointing element with the target and inputting a "select" command using a controller of some type) in real time within the confines of the rules of gameplay.

A shooter isn't much different than a game like candy crush in base mechanical gameplay...you find a desirable target, then move a cursor to the target and select it using some type of interface.

The difference is in the context, given to the player through animations.

Candy Crush offers the player a colorful display with movement and sound that lets us know we've accomplished the task...identify and select an appropriate target.

Shooters do the same thing, but within the visual context of fantansy violence...and I think this is the real hang-up for people who see video games as a potential influencer of violent behavior.

A shooter doesn't train a better soldier...it dosen't teach toughness, personal discipline, riflery...maybe it coule be argued to help with target identification and selection...but that seems like a fairly cerebral skill to me.

Do shooters numb their players to the violence they depict? I think that's a really fair question to ask, and...I don't know. I have played shooters for years, and I have never felt the desire to act out those behaviors on the street. If anything (speaking for me, alone here) I'd say that shooter video games offer something of the opposite...a way to act out my most violent fantasies in a totally harmless space. If I have a really bad day, I can always load up Red Dead Redemtion 2 and take Arthur into town on a murderous rampage...all the catharsis of violent outburst with none of the real-world repurcussions.

To me...the shooter takes the same place as violent comics, books, and movies...it affords a way to express our inappropriate desires in an appropriate forum.

Does that move the conversation more toward the answer you were looking for?

 

[VulpesForge]

https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/explorer/national/united-states/shr
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Crime Data Explorer

Go ahead; explore 'Victim Circumstance' where 'arguments' are the largest count of any categorizable information, or 'Murder Victims by Weapon' where edged weapons are #2 (after firearms) or 'Victim's Relationship to the Offender' where
'acquaintance, stranger and other-known to victim' are the top three categorizations

Would you conclude that random violence is on the upswing?

We actually can't conclude anything as they outright admit in the first lines that over 2000 of the 18,000 agencies aren't represented. We need to know the reason those agencies weren't included to understand any of the further data as 10% is a pretty big margin of error. However, fatherless or single parent homes are probably more closely related to the issue rather than the rise and popularity of video games. Parental guidance is and always has been the major deciding factor in behavior.

 

[BugI02]

I'm not one to use the phrase "wrong side of history" often...

... but...

You might want to approach this from a facts/research angle instead of the feelings angle.

You feel games could contribute to people acting out, but there's no data to show that.

We can always include other forms of media and entertainment... but then you'd lose the "bash the youngsters" thing.

I'm perfectly willing to include cinematic glorification of mindless violence, but I was too busy walking uphill (both ways) to school to have much inclination to waste time on either

Kids today something something

 

[Alpo]

I'm not one to use the phrase "wrong side of history" often...

... but...

You might want to approach this from a facts/research angle instead of the feelings angle.

You feel games could contribute to people acting out, but there's no data to show that.

We can always include other forms of media and entertainment... but then you'd lose the "bash the youngsters" thing.

What is apparent is that the "deviant" now has numerous outlets to research and express ideas that are anti-social. Does this serve to defuse their anger/rage or enhance it? Do movies today in any way desensitize an individual to violence?

I think they are all worthy areas of discussion and there is little doubt that individuals have become more isolated as a result of the internet. In the old days with no internet and 3 major TV networks, I think we were a bit more motivated to get out of the house and down the the local tavern or bowling alley or Elks Lodge or VFW or ________ and interact with others face to face. That doesn't happen as often. It's much easier to interact on line and pontificate where there is no real downside to bad behavior.

I know that even when visiting in person, people now spend time looking at their phone and typing rather than directly listening and responding to people sitting in the same room. I refused to go out to dinner with my oldest son when it became apparent that his phone held more interest than any topic we might discuss.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Definitely open to studies proving otherwise, too. I just don't think it's there right now.

Regardless, I think far more good comes from the gaming industry than any perceived bad. The communities, interactions with peers, cooperation skills. Education is a huge benefit, too.

That and it's a hugely profitable hobby, brings great stories and experiences to people much like movies/books. I have a hard time leveling with a politician that wants to restrict the medium when it brings so much positive and good. Some of the best stories I've taken in were from video games. Some of the best art I've seen has originated from video games. Even violent ones.

 

[PaulF]

Maybe you should run the google search 'attacks with samurai sword' before you display such certainty that gameworld will not overflow into realworld. If random murder is just 'good clean fun' fit for entertainment, what will you do when 'Grand Theft Pedophile' or 'The Grooming Game' comes out. Please feel free to not answer the question with some kind of ridicule about future crime, but at heart the question is where do we draw the line on perversity as entertainment

It's not whether games make you a better swordsman, it's whether they abrade the layers of civilization meant to keep you from solving your problems with a weapon. Why do we teach rigorous safe gun handling and respect for the capabilities of the weapons? Why is personal honor and restraint such a large part of most (worthwhile) teaching of martial arts? Is it because we want to strangle any idea that a weapon be used for any other purpose than defense of oneself and innocent others and even then as a last resort? And is it possible wholesale killing positioned as revenge or entertainment weakens those lessons?

In this day of Big Data and real-world/virtual-world integration it seems to me GTP or the Grooming Game would be net benefits to society...they offer no attraction to well adjusted people, but do allow Big Brother to locate and identify people that do show an actionalbe attraction to such material...much in the same way that lolicon is being targeted througout europe. (FFS DONT GOOGLE LOLICON)

 

[Brad69]

Just don’t play video games in a trailer park!

Alpo you wanna attend a DJT rally with me?

 

[BugI02]

A first-person shooter, mechanically, trains the player to locate and identify targets (usually by aligning a pointing element with the target and inputting a "select" command using a controller of some type) in real time within the confines of the rules of gameplay.

A shooter isn't much different than a game like candy crush in base mechanical gameplay...you find a desirable target, then move a cursor to the target and select it using some type of interface.

The difference is in the context, given to the player through animations.

Candy Crush offers the player a colorful display with movement and sound that lets us know we've accomplished the task...identify and select an appropriate target.

Shooters do the same thing, but within the visual context of fantansy violence...and I think this is the real hang-up for people who see video games as a potential influencer of violent behavior.

A shooter doesn't train a better soldier...it dosen't teach toughness, personal discipline, riflery...maybe it coule be argued to help with target identification and selection...but that seems like a fairly cerebral skill to me.

Do shooters numb their players to the violence they depict? I think that's a really fair question to ask, and...I don't know. I have played shooters for years, and I have never felt the desire to act out those behaviors on the street. If anything (speaking for me, alone here) I'd say that shooter video games offer something of the opposite...a way to act out my most violent fantasies in a totally harmless space. If I have a really bad day, I can always load up Red Dead Redemtion 2 and take Arthur into town on a murderous rampage...all the catharsis of violent outburst with none of the real-world repurcussions.

To me...the shooter takes the same place as violent comics, books, and movies...it affords a way to express our inappropriate desires in an appropriate forum.

Does that move the conversation more toward the answer you were looking for?

I would ask if you did not find a disturbingly FPS similarity in the NZ shooter's live feed of his random slaughter and if you think this was deliberate and if so why he might have wished to do so

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I think they are all worthy areas of discussion and there is little doubt that individuals have become more isolated as a result of the internet.

Absolutely. I think it's too early to say this is a 100% bad thing, though. There's a lot of good that comes from it, and it's not like we can just get rid of the internet. It was destined to be on our evolutionary path, now we have to work with it. I absolutely see (and sometimes crave) the "old days" where we were more social and outgoing.

But it's probably not as bad as we make it out to be. I still see massively crowded bowling alleys when I go, I see sidewalks filled with people in Greenwood playing Pokemon Go, even. Games can also bring people out into the world. It's rarer... but still happens.

I would ask if you did not find a disturbingly FPS similarity in the NZ shooter's live feed of his random slaughter and if you think this was deliberate and if so why he might have wished to do so

He made it clear that his goal was to rile up the media, and he used references to do so. I'd say he was far more influenced by the media than any video game.

 

[PaulF]

I would ask if you did not find a disturbingly FPS similarity in the NZ shooter's live feed of his random slaughter and if you think this was deliberate and if so why he might have wished to do so

Honeslty, I'm not informed enough to make a comment on that. I haven't seen the live feed, and I have no desire to watch it just to see if I think it might be influenced by gaming culture.

I would probably argue that there is a modern trend to record and broadcast everything now, and that influence probably played a greater role in his decision making...

...but, again, I'm not interested in putting his actions into my recollection to verify my current suspicions on this point.

 

[VulpesForge]

I would ask if you did not find a disturbingly FPS similarity in the NZ shooter's live feed of his random slaughter and if you think this was deliberate and if so why he might have wished to do so

Yes, they share a point of view. Go pro's are typically affixed to helmets, though. Does a rock climbing video with a helmet go pro in the first person share the same disturbing qualities? The qualities of other first person games? Would you argue that kind of game compels you to go climb rocks?

 

[BugI02]

We actually can't conclude anything as they outright admit in the first lines that over 2000 of the 18,000 agencies aren't represented. We need to know the reason those agencies weren't included to understand any of the further data as 10% is a pretty big margin of error. However, fatherless or single parent homes are probably more closely related to the issue rather than the rise and popularity of video games. Parental guidance is and always has been the major deciding factor in behavior.

You do realize that, after saying too much data is missing to meaningfully draw conclusions for motivation, you then draw conclusions on motivation favorable to your desired viewpoint? I was challenged to show that statistics for the frequency of violent crime were going up and did so

For refreshers: "If your assertion is correct, then the frequency of violent crime should be going up. Do you have some statistics that show that?"

 

[VulpesForge]

You do realize that, after saying too much data is missing to meaningfully draw conclusions for motivation, you then draw conclusions on motivation favorable to your desired viewpoint? I was challenged to show that statistics for the frequency of violent crime were going up and did so

For refreshers: "If your assertion is correct, then the frequency of violent crime should be going up. Do you have some statistics that show that?"

I'm saying we need to know why the data was excluded, not that it precludes your points. The graph you show definitely shows an uptick, but I can present a graph that shows a correlation between real butter vs margarine and the effects it has on divorce rates. (this is an actual graph that exists that shows higher divorce rates coincide with couples that use margarine instead of real butter) Does that mean using real butter will make your marriage better? Of course not. What it might show is that people with traditional values tend to use real butter and traditional values make marriages last. Without all the information, the graph is useless and is mostly pointless correlation anyway. Even if we say there was an uptick in violence, we can't outright say "Video games did this." as anything more than conjecture.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/

Here's a graph showing the trend for the last 27 years nationwide minus the most recent two. This is arguably the time that video games have been most harshly impacting the youth in our culture.

 

[BugI02]

What is apparent is that the "deviant" now has numerous outlets to research and express ideas that are anti-social. Does this serve to defuse their anger/rage or enhance it? Do movies today in any way desensitize an individual to violence?

I think they are all worthy areas of discussion and there is little doubt that individuals have become more isolated as a result of the internet. In the old days with no internet and 3 major TV networks, I think we were a bit more motivated to get out of the house and down the the local tavern or bowling alley or Elks Lodge or VFW or ________ and interact with others face to face. That doesn't happen as often. It's much easier to interact on line and pontificate where there is no real downside to bad behavior.

I know that even when visiting in person, people now spend time looking at their phone and typing rather than directly listening and responding to people sitting in the same room. I refused to go out to dinner with my oldest son when it became apparent that his phone held more interest than any topic we might discuss.

I hear ya', Alpo. When my good friends and I are socializing, none of us even have audible alerts on or check incoming messages. Unless you have children who are not yet grown or loved ones traveling, it should be possible to put the 'fidget spinner' down for a couple of hours and interact with people you like and respect and whose company you seek out. I would think people would learn this skill in meetings if not anywhere else. Not all distractions are equal, a ringing telephone does not have to be answered immediately - same way with an incoming text or email. The inability to do so seems disturbingly Pavlovian