Teaching to kill through online gaming.

[Fantasies_only]

Is it possible in the near future?
I think so.
Is it a probable outcome in the far future?
I'm not sure, but I would like to know what you think (conspiracists welcome).

[Bert Notorius]

Ender's Game

[Fantasies_only]

Originally Posted by Bert Notorius

Ender's Game

That's pretty close, but I was thinking more of home gaming, like if the Government forced Microsoft to include some kind of ocular nano device (distributed as an EMP in the ear traveling through the nervous system to the brain) in their new console, to take control of youthful citizens in an MK-Ultra scenario.

Nintendo and Sony can also do this with videogame mind control devices (coming this Christmas) which turn out to be real mind control devices.

[Bert Notorius]

[Fantasies_only]

I wasn't even thinking about it, but they're making a movie that includes this very subject (about controlling real soldiers with video games).
I think it's called "Game Over".

[Fantasies_only]

Originally Posted by Fantasies_only

That's pretty close, but I was thinking more of home gaming, like if the Government forced Microsoft to include some kind of ocular nano device (distributed as an EMP in the ear traveling through the nervous system to the brain) in their new console, to take control of youthful citizens in an MK-Ultra scenario.

Nintendo and Sony can also do this with videogame mind control devices (coming this Christmas) which turn out to be real mind control devices.

Do you think this is a realistic scenario?
If the public fears Government control over us, wouldn't it be likely to do so in an easier manner?
Just about everyone (with a few exceptions) has a game console with online capability.

[ImOnIt]

Teaching paranoia by >> INSERT CONTEMPORARY ISSUE HERE.


Fucking lol.

[tinylittlegnat]

This is a dumb scenario. The govt did tests on mind control in the 60s 70s and 80s with drugs and other methods and the amount of control you get is slim to none.

I do alot of gaming and there is a huge difference between shooting an alien with a gun that shoots laser grenades than there is a real person with a real gun. Videogames don't encite violence anymore than watching a movie about boxing makes someone a heavyweight boxing champ.

I play some of the most gorey bloody violent games there are. And they make me want to shoot someone about as much as the original mario bros ispired me to jump on turtles, grab flags off flagpoles, and breath underwater to find a magic sewer pipe.

It makes decent science fiction books and shitty movies but thats all.

[Peregrinator]

http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingre.../2004/06/63911

[insert____here]

the ability to take a random life willingly is something governments have been trying to instill in military personnel for decades. but even my grandad will tell you that when the bullets are flying, most people aren't aiming or trying to kill anyone. they're just shooting so they don't get shot at. it's a duck and cover thing that's all. shoot to protect your mate, shoot to protect your life, but it's self defence and alot of soldiers can't do it or miss.
it's a very very rare person who will willingly and in cold blood kill somone they have never met because another person wants them to. that's why those people earn lots and lots of money as snipers or assasins for hire.
of course there are the phsycos and mass murderers, but then they are a different brand of person all together.

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Originally Posted by insert____here

the ability to take a random life willingly is something governments have been trying to instill in military personnel for decades. but even my grandad will tell you that when the bullets are flying, most people aren't aiming or trying to kill anyone. they're just shooting so they don't get shot at. it's a duck and cover thing that's all. shoot to protect your mate, shoot to protect your life, but it's self defence and alot of soldiers can't do it or miss.
it's a very very rare person who will willingly and in cold blood kill somone they have never met because another person wants them to. that's why those people earn lots and lots of money as snipers or assasins for hire.
of course there are the phsycos and mass murderers, but then they are a different brand of person all together.

I think you would be surprised at exactly how many people would kill another person given the chance, the proper motivation (even if the motivation is a lie.. i.e. that person is a murderer and deserves to die), and a guarantee of zero repercussions.

I would guess for most it would actually be easier if it were someone they never met. No emotional attachment, less second thought, and less grief. It's not as far fetched as you would like to believe.

[human_male]

I've heard the argument that comes up now and again that violent computer games essentially teach people how to kill. The army uses simulators for training after all. And I have to say I agree.

As I sit here flicking patato chip crumbs off my pale, grossly distended belly, and consider all the thousands of hours I've played computer games, I can't help but think what an absolutely leathal muther fucker I must be by now, and woe betide anyone stupid enough to rile me.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by insert____here

the ability to take a random life willingly is something governments have been trying to instill in military personnel for decades. but even my grandad will tell you that when the bullets are flying, most people aren't aiming or trying to kill anyone. they're just shooting so they don't get shot at. it's a duck and cover thing that's all. shoot to protect your mate, shoot to protect your life, but it's self defence and alot of soldiers can't do it or miss.
it's a very very rare person who will willingly and in cold blood kill somone they have never met because another person wants them to. that's why those people earn lots and lots of money as snipers or assasins for hire.
of course there are the phsycos and mass murderers, but then they are a different brand of person all together.

That's not so much willingness as talent. Many people will kill given the right circumstances and incentive but whether or not they are any good at it is another matter.

[Kybele]

Originally Posted by human_male

I've heard the argument that comes up now and again that violent computer games essentially teach people how to kill. The army uses simulators for training after all. And I have to say I agree.

As I sit here flicking patato chip crumbs off my pale, grossly distended belly, and consider all the thousands of hours I've played computer games, I can't help but think what an absolutely leathal muther fucker I must be by now, and woe betide anyone stupid enough to rile me.

are you le jerk's funny and witty persona?

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Originally Posted by tinylittlegnat

This is a dumb scenario. The govt did tests on mind control in the 60s 70s and 80s with drugs and other methods and the amount of control you get is slim to none.

I do alot of gaming and there is a huge difference between shooting an alien with a gun that shoots laser grenades than there is a real person with a real gun. Videogames don't encite violence anymore than watching a movie about boxing makes someone a heavyweight boxing champ.

I play some of the most gorey bloody violent games there are. And they make me want to shoot someone about as much as the original mario bros ispired me to jump on turtles, grab flags off flagpoles, and breath underwater to find a magic sewer pipe.

It makes decent science fiction books and shitty movies but thats all.

Originally Posted by Ulaven_Demorte

I think you would be surprised at exactly how many people would kill another person given the chance, the proper motivation (even if the motivation is a lie.. i.e. that person is a murderer and deserves to die), and a guarantee of zero repercussions.

I would guess for most it would actually be easier if it were someone they never met. No emotional attachment, less second thought, and less grief. It's not as far fetched as you would like to believe.

Talk about people with tenuous holds on reality...

OMG! I never realized the hole went that deep.

Yiks

[off2bed]

Originally Posted by insert____here

the ability to take a random life willingly is something governments have been trying to instill in military personnel for decades. but even my grandad will tell you that when the bullets are flying, most people aren't aiming or trying to kill anyone. they're just shooting so they don't get shot at. it's a duck and cover thing that's all. shoot to protect your mate, shoot to protect your life, but it's self defence and alot of soldiers can't do it or miss.
it's a very very rare person who will willingly and in cold blood kill somone they have never met because another person wants them to. that's why those people earn lots and lots of money as snipers or assasins for hire.
of course there are the phsycos and mass murderers, but then they are a different brand of person all together.

Bullshit.

People have been willingly and in cold blood killing people they have never met because they or another person wants them to. Millions of them. They call it planned parenthood.

[tactful]

Originally Posted by Fantasies_only

Is it possible in the near future?
I think so.
Is it a probable outcome in the far future?
I'm not sure, but I would like to know what you think (conspiracists welcome).

In plane, with artillery or even in a tank, maybe, but for the infantrymen, all the fun will stop the moment they realize the person they're shooting at, is shooting back at them, with real live ammo.
So, have fun but, duck and cover when you're out there, playing for keeps.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by tactful

In plane, with artillery or even in a tank, maybe, but for the infantrymen, all the fun will stop the moment they realize the person they're shooting at, is shooting back at them, with real live ammo.
So, have fun but, duck and cover when you're out there, playing for keeps.

He's talking about mind control, not training with simulators.

And he's a pedophile.

[JohnnySavage]

I really need to get one of those game consoles. I had an X Box a few years ago, but the aliens always killed me. I could never get off the space station so I gave it to the neighbor kid.

[tactful]

Originally Posted by John Doe

He's talking about mind control, not training with simulators.

And he's a pedophile.

Ok, my bad, I was thinking Twilight Zone here, oops.
I'm up for another coffee.

[KRCummings]

Originally Posted by Bert Notorius

Ender's Game

Ender had two nervous breakdowns. I don't think he's a good example.

[Fantasies_only]

Originally Posted by tinylittlegnat

This is a dumb scenario. The govt did tests on mind control in the 60s 70s and 80s with drugs and other methods and the amount of control you get is slim to none.

I do alot of gaming and there is a huge difference between shooting an alien with a gun that shoots laser grenades than there is a real person with a real gun. Videogames don't encite violence anymore than watching a movie about boxing makes someone a heavyweight boxing champ.

I play some of the most gorey bloody violent games there are. And they make me want to shoot someone about as much as the original mario bros ispired me to jump on turtles, grab flags off flagpoles, and breath underwater to find a magic sewer pipe.

It makes decent science fiction books and shitty movies but thats all.

Hey, I agree with you on all points, except effectiveness.
It is very easy to control a person over time, such as child grooming, a combination of discipline, threats, and paranoia, even shock treatment with behavior rewards, or addiction and pleasure enhancement (such as solders with LSD withdraws).

How difficult is it to think a ray gun controller is a pistol or rifle when on drugs?
I understand some realistic games even come with gun controllers that really look like guns!

I wasn't referring to gaming stimulus (being a Jack Thompson), but outside influence controlling one remotely.

[Recidiva]

I come from a gamer family. Husband games, I game, daughter games, son games.

I'm playing Dragon Age Origins right now and happily murdering everything that crosses my path and attempts to look at me funny.

Gaming is a fantasy. It might help you develop better tactics and response times, but you have something busted in your brain if you can't separate a real target from a pretend target.

To me it's like asking if everyone goes to action movies is guilty of murder and only watches these things because they glorify violence.

Yeah, probably a couple of dumbasses do, but the fact that there are dumbasses in the world doesn't mean that watching "Independence Day" means I have fantasies of seeing the world destroyed and I can't wait to do it.

I think the people that develop these theories could really use some help separating fantasy from reality themselves.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Fantasies_only

Hey, I agree with you on all points, except effectiveness.
It is very easy to control a person over time, such as child grooming, a combination of discipline, threats, and paranoia, even shock treatment with behavior rewards, or addiction and pleasure enhancement (such solders with LSD withdraws).

How difficult is it to think a ray gun controller is a pistol or rifle when on drugs?
I understand some realistic games even come with gun controllers that really look like guns!

I wasn't referring to gaming stimulus (being a Jack Thompson), but outside influence controlling one remotely.

You're even crazier than Jack Thompson, which is quite an accomplishment.

[TurdFergeson]

I knew it!

"Duck Hunt" was a psy-ops campaign!

I made it to level 20.

:P