I understand the sentiment, I am unable to traverse your distance.
Firstly - I'm not sure if this is part of the topic at hand.
Secondly a good response is going to be pretty detailed, since you've touched on a huge topic.
Technology has moved faster than legislation. Which is fine and expected. The technology brings up intricate questions which take time to answer, let alone decide on what/how/if something is to be legislated.
Thats the part which is relevant to the original discussion. Technology may leap ahead, it doesn't mean that legal understanding wont catch up and be good at it drawing the line.
--------------
A more detailed response on your assertion that Zynga is a 21st century drug dealer. While I think social games do raise some important and concerning issues, I think the responses will fall short of the distance you travel.
Zynga's games, and a large group of social games for example; are cute skinner boxes. I don't see how legislating against that aspect will be viable.
At most I can see rules laid down to ensure that the slot machine/random aspect of it, has some clear cut pay out schemes that must be enforced.
Nor do I see how I can make a case where ".. are designed to turn people into clicking-addicted machines." Its a skinner box. People have an ancient immunity to things like this, namely boredom.
Over time, people get bored and drift away. Witness the share price of Zynga and dropping engagement rates.
I've also played with, and worked alongside a lot of those psychologically vulnerable members of society - they've all pretty much gone on to kick the 'habit' or manage it like entertainment.
I've also been looking at data or articles that come out on internet addiction and gaming addiction; most people can barely agree that this is a condition. Only a few people are categorized as being victims, compared to the large number of people who play video games or use the net.
Firstly - I'm not sure if this is part of the topic at hand. Secondly a good response is going to be pretty detailed, since you've touched on a huge topic.
Technology has moved faster than legislation. Which is fine and expected. The technology brings up intricate questions which take time to answer, let alone decide on what/how/if something is to be legislated.
Thats the part which is relevant to the original discussion. Technology may leap ahead, it doesn't mean that legal understanding wont catch up and be good at it drawing the line.
--------------
A more detailed response on your assertion that Zynga is a 21st century drug dealer. While I think social games do raise some important and concerning issues, I think the responses will fall short of the distance you travel.
Zynga's games, and a large group of social games for example; are cute skinner boxes. I don't see how legislating against that aspect will be viable.
At most I can see rules laid down to ensure that the slot machine/random aspect of it, has some clear cut pay out schemes that must be enforced.
Nor do I see how I can make a case where ".. are designed to turn people into clicking-addicted machines." Its a skinner box. People have an ancient immunity to things like this, namely boredom.
Over time, people get bored and drift away. Witness the share price of Zynga and dropping engagement rates.
I've also played with, and worked alongside a lot of those psychologically vulnerable members of society - they've all pretty much gone on to kick the 'habit' or manage it like entertainment.
I've also been looking at data or articles that come out on internet addiction and gaming addiction; most people can barely agree that this is a condition. Only a few people are categorized as being victims, compared to the large number of people who play video games or use the net.