Video Games and Freedom

Today, the Supreme Court voted 7-2 to strike down a California law prohibiting the sale of "violent" video games to children. Former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed the law in 2005, believes that the government has a "responsibility" to protect kids and communities "against the effects of games that depict ultraviolent actions." But writing for the majority today, Justice Antonin Scalia claims that the law "is seriously overinclusive," stripping "the First Amendment rights of young people whose [family members] think violent video games are a harmless pastime."

The video game ban draws parallelism to the movie ratings. Children under the age of 17 require an accompanying adult over the age of 18 to view R-rated movies. There currently also exists the NC-17 rating, which prohibits those under 17 in all circumstances. It is important to note though, that any ban on video games can only prohibit the sale, not the usage. The analogy to movies begins to fall here, since video games are played at home, while movies are played in theaters, where restrictions can be effectively enforced. Government cannot, on practical terms, prohibit children from playing of violent video games at home. The California ban would've been similar to the R rating. It is the parent giving the approval, but in the end, it is the child playing the game, or watching the movie. But is that the effective solution against violent video games?

Studies have shown that violent video games have detrimental effects. The American Academy of Pediatrics concluded in a 2009 study that "exposure to different forms of media ... can contribute to aggressive behavior, desensitization to violence, nightmares and fear of being harmed." However, whether or not there is parental consent does not alter the games' effects. Furthermore, there is no NC-17 equivalent of video games to truly contain the effects. If the government truly wants to mitigate the effects of violent video games on children, it should focus on informing parents and the children about the negative effects. Restricting children's ability to buy them on their own is not effective in reducing the negative effects; they still have legal outlets to play the games, which causes the same negative effects. This isn't battle against drugs or even controlling movie viewing. When it comes down legal domestic activities like playing video games, violent or not, there can be no containment, only education and information.

Sources:

• Supreme Court Case 08-1448: Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association
• http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/27/scotus.video.games/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
• http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2011/06/27/video-game-violence-what-the-science-shows/
• http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/27/supreme-court-to-rule-on-violent-video-games-for-kids/?test=latestnews

Perception of Costs

This entry was written and archived on April 25, 2011. Location at the time of writing: New York City

There’s a marginal cost to driving, namely the price of gasoline. When one substitutes driving with biking, that marginal cost is spared, but the saving is barely tangible. Why? That’s because when we turn on the engine and drive, we don’t envision a price meter slowly increasing, as observed on taxis, even though that’s essentially what’s happening as the gas is being used. Instead, we just envision the costs of driving all at once when we go to the gas station. When the predominant mode of transportation takes on public forms (bus, Subway), the perception of the costs is much tangible, because we either pay with real money the moment we get on them, or see the remaining balance left on the Metrocard decreasing every time we swipe it.

It’s easy for me to say that “today, I rode my bike to and from the hospital, and that saved me $4.50 of fares.” It will be difficult for me to say in a hypothetical situation back home that “I rode to and from the school, and that saved me $1 of gasoline.” While the latter statement would be indeed true, the perception of costs just isn’t the same because even if I had driven, I wouldn’t have physically paid a dollar, or seen some balance decrease by a dollar. But at the end, the cost was the same. It’s important to take note of the cost, even if it is not tangibly felt every moment.

Hello World

Computer programmers, regardless of what language they write in, always have their first program display the words "Hello World." This is going to be easier than System.out.println("Hello World"); or MsgBox "Hello World."

Hello World. This blog is meant to keep track of my informal expositions. Unrestrained by any topic restraints, this hopes to remain as a general collection of ideas.