Hacker News Reader

Comment by ManFromUranus | Hacker News Reader

No but the poster you are replying to is correct. The article is indeed a "shitpiece" against capitalism, it seeks to paint shitty video games that bilk their users of money as some sort of phenomenon that unique to capitalism. Therefore we need to enact "Big Government" to solve the problem. The author nor the readers generally could not care less about those affected, their only concern are the delicious condemnations of capitalism. Meanwhile in Venezuela, and the USSR, and Vietnam and North Korea and on and on and on... maybe in some fictional country where humans are perfect robots their ludicrous socialist fantasy is possible, just not in the real world.

View on HN

Even if you abhor the remedies suggested in the article, it is still true that marketers in general are trying very hard to run ahead of the average person's cognitive defences against exploitation. Given that, much of the discussion in the article is interesting and useful (and by that I don't mean "correct".)

The problems cited by the article are real, and the game makers are shitty people with bad motives. Unfortunately neither government (nor anyone) can make the world idiot proof, sometimes people have to learn from their own mistakes.

I don't agree with the article's presentation, but the idea might not be inherently worthless.

Gambling which abstractly seems rather harmless has been banned. So, some taking a hard look at highly additive gamely seems reasonable IMO.

Edited: I put drugs in a similar category, but I can see people disagreeing with that.

I agree that gambling is indeed bad, but gambling is not some sort of outgrowth of capitalism. You do not need captialism to gamble and one does not beget the other. The "game" makers are simply bad people exploiting others. These bad people would simply be bad in a different way in a socialist country.

Fair point. However, there are a bunch of complex laws in the US around gambling and gambling as a business is often banned where doing the same things as individuals is more often legal. Old but interesting: http://fortune.com/2011/02/15/was-my-sports-bet-legal/

Which I think get's into the same incentives as these games. If the house get's a cut of from poker players without risks they have reason to promote addiction. On the other hand friends playing for bubble gum can enjoy betting without meaningful downsides.

I don't think their are clear cut answers, but special regulations for companies due to the nature of capitalism has precedent in the US.

I think that the danger is: you make a law to protect idiots from their own stupidity and end up breaking normal business activity somehow, or creating a regulatory environment that's a pain in the ass for entrepreneurs and whatnot.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com