Subject:
|
Re: Fan Thank You Letter
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:44:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1413 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
snip
>
> As a tangent, but one I'd be curious to hear about, does anyone know much
> about those experiments in which a rat pushes a lever continuously even when
> pushing the lever only occasionally results in a food pellet? It would be
> interesting to see how the results would be affected if every so often the
> lever caused some deterrent effect, like a startling air horn, to offset the
> possible food pellet payoff. Has such an experiment been performed? That
> would seem at least broadly analogous to the cost/benefit of theft. Hmm...
snippage
> Dave!
I believe you are referring to the Skinner box, in which the rats are
'trained' to perform certain tasks by a cost/reward method. When the rat
presses lever, he gets food. after a while, the food stops and the rat
continues to push lever. There are modifications to this idea, some of
which I go into below. I don't know much about it except my recent reading
about addictive video games.
There have been other instances when these scientists wire into the rats
'pleasure center' and have lever stimulate that center. The rat foregoes
the food lever for the pleasure lever, and literally starves to death. Love
these scientists that do this kinda stuff...
This was brought up most lately by on-line RPG's. I am an avid player of EQ
(at least I was until relatively recently) and there has been much concern
over video game addiction.
It's like the rat--when the rat presses a lever, only at random times may
food come out, so the rat is trained to press the lever many times and in
many different ways to get the food. EQ has experience gains that only come
randomly when you work at what you want to increase in experience. When you
see that number go up, is like a rush and you're happier than if you never
tried at all.
It gets to the point where some have given up family, friends and work to
play a video game. People point and say, 'Oh, it's a bad video game...' My
point is that it's the person who has to take responsibility for his or her
actions, not the game. It's the drunk driver who is being stupid, not the
beer bottle, is the smoker, not the cigarette, is the gambler, not the deck
of cards (read in this rant that when i say cigarettes, beer bottle, and
deck of cards, I also infer the brewing companies and bars, the cigarette
manufacturers, and the casinoes and any industry so related).
Much akin to gambling, alcohol and drugs, RPG's can stimulate something in
the brain to the point where the person wants that stimulation, wants the 'fix'.
So their lives fall apart, due to <insert addiction here>.
Iain and Larry's 'addiction' to roller coasters can be seen as a somewhat
crazy but mostly harmless diversion. Where do you draw the line between a
diversion, hobby, and addiction. I know people on EQ who play 80+ hours a
week, yet they still keep their jobs, the bills are still paid, etc. 80+
hours would, to some, be an unequivocal addiction. To me, who cares? He's
harming no one, he makes money, so why would we want to interfere? Sure
it's a little weird. My dad thinks that playing with LEGO at 35+ years old
is a little weird. Who makes the decision? Who says that 'when you do this
for this long, is bad! Up until that line, is okay.'
This really has nothing to do with thiefery, but there is a way it does relate.
Some thieves, so I read somewhere, do what they do just for the adrenaline
rush. Like the rush from mountain climbing or skydiving (or those zany
people who love rollercoasters ::coughIainLarrycough::), they like the rush.
So what do you do? What can you do... life goes on for the rest of us.
We're left wondering 'What if life were like this... without crooks!'
I think, for my personal way of living, that I'd be alot happier 'cause I'm
forever misplacing my keys... keys are only needed to stop the crooks!
Dave
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Fan Thank You Letter
|
| (...) Feh! What does an economist know about cost/benefit analysis? Interesting article overall, though some of his assumptions seem to depend too much on ideal models rather than real-world situations. The problem, as I see it, is that Thief A (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jun-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
37 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
