siliconwafer writes: "An article in The Economist raises some interesting points about addiction to video games, drawing from psychology and sociology to describe why certain people prefer certain types of games, and why they might become addicted to them. It is suggested that to discourage addiction, game designers could have their games recognize addictive behavior and respond to it by encouraging gamers to take breaks. Do game designers have any responsibility to recognize addictive behavior, or does this responsibility fall solely on the gamer (or the gamer's parents in the case of a minor)?"
(Score: 2, Interesting) by weeds on Tuesday February 25 2014, @06:02PM
Headline ends with "?" answer is "No"
I think this is becoming the SN meme.
An addictive personality can become addicted to just about anything, pulling out eyebrows, purging, even working out or running. Just exactly how are we going to decide which ones the "supplier" should be required to build in addiction preventing or alleviating systems? AFAIK, I can stop at the store on the way home and buy a bottle of Gin and drink the whole thing without it warning me of my behavior or telling me to take a break.
Get money out of politics! [mayday.us]
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday February 25 2014, @07:13PM
That's not addiction, that's obsessive-compulsive disorder. As to headlines being answered with "no", that comes from a newspaper reporter named Betterage, who coined "betterige's law of headlines" and then prompty broke that law himself.
Poe's Law [nooze.org] has nothing to do with Edgar Allen Poetry