Most everything you do in life is chasing highs and reinforcing biological addictions or psychological habits. Going for a run? Chasing that runner's high, scratching that addiction itch. Having sex? Getting that orgasm high, scratching that addiction itch. Eating food you love? Getting that sugar high, scratching that addiction itch.
Utilitarian gamblers, in essence, are looking for something to do. Many are seniors, who are looking to kill time, reduce boredom, or simply get out of the house – and they are less motivated by financial rewards or excitement. Some enjoy people-watching as much as the actual slot play.
Excitement gamblers are looking for a buzz – the thrill of winning a jackpot, relaxing and having a good time. This group doesn’t like progressive machines with bigger payouts because they don’t pay off frequently enough to provide the excitement.
Multipurpose gamblers tend to be younger, less educated, have lower household income, and are less likely to be married and own a home. Their motivation is to have fun and win money, and they are attracted to themed games and other machines they consider “lucky” or fun to play.
Relaxation gamblers were the most educated and well-to-do, and played slot machines for the socialization and fun. However, they also like to stay within their denomination – usually 25-cent machines or $1 machines, and often look at slot play as a way to relieve day-to-day stress.
There are PopCap themed slot machines already. Their characters are just as "kid friendly" in the sense that they are simple and stylized, but again PopCap's products are for adults and not kids.
>One thing we should be able to agree on, though, is that using childrens-book cartoon characters in gambling products does no-one any favours.
FarmVille was never made for kids or to appeal to kids. Children are not the only ones who like cartoon characters. None of this is marketed to kids. If they marketed on the same channels or sites kids go to then I'd agree with you but as is aesthetics alone is not enough.
Just because it does not appeal to you does not mean it doesn't appeal to other adults. It does not mean it automatically appeals to kids either.
>Should parents keep their children in a virtual home prison?
I'm not about to tell parents what to do, but if I were a parent I would want my kids to be as wordly as possible and to understand the way things work as soon as possible. Understanding that gambling is not a way to make money (unless you own the machines) is a good thing to know. It's not about being a hawk and watching every action, and banning things so there is no chance of anyone being exposed. It's about building up key knowledge, allowing them to make mistakes, and having a positive enough environment where they can safely learn from their mistakes.
Simplified shapes? Must be appealing to all small children! I remember being a kid and I liked cooler, detailed things. Likewise as an adult I really appreciate simplified designs. It may appeal to some kids but not all.
UK being a nanny state is not a good thing. It is the job of the parent to give and take access to things. Let's ban all graphics because they could appeal to some kid out there whose parents are irresponsible.
Should people be ineligible if they are born infertile?
We could say that we probably won't have enough younger people to take care of the older people as birth rates decrease, but I think robots and AI will be more developed by then that either more people will be available to take care of the elderly and or the robots will do it along with all other service and manual labor jobs.
44% isn't a high divorce rate? It is higher than it has been ever in our history. 6% away from flipping a coin that your marriage will fail. No thanks.
The proportion of children born outside of marriage, and more likely to not have strong father figures, is growing every year. Most mothers get custody, and most children don't have a strong father figure.
The marriage rate in the US is dropping drastically as well. Marriage doesn't make sense. Guys have nothing to gain from marriage and only things to lose. No, you don't get loyalty when you get married, and you don't get any of the other things you want. Most guys say they get less of what they want from their spouse after marriage.
There are genetic qualities which are passed on silently and only expressed after certain situations occur. If this were not the case there would be only heterosexual people.
Most people who seem stupid are only stupid because they lack what equally capable, but perceived as gifted or intelligent, people have. Most people have much the same genetic wetware capabilities - brain damaged people an exception - the biggest biological differences between most people are in hormones, and changes in hormones are largely a product of environment and can be changed just as knowledge can be changed. A human's potential is able to be expressed with an abundance of knowledge and the lack of enforced ideology. Allow people reference, perspective, and freedom and they will seem like smarter people than whose without. The sooner people have the best situation the better but it is never too old for someone to get smart.
Upbringing is much less important for development than genetics? No. Single mothers who raise kids in poverty with no father figure raise more daughters who have more kids without getting married or even involving a strong father figure (repeating the cycle), and more sons who become criminals or forever doing minimum wage jobs and going nowhere. Parenting > culture > genetics. Your genetic predisposition does not make you who you are. A person who is sheltered and not able to see the world is much worse off than a person who is given perspective about the world and able to expand their library of thoughts.
Which of my opinions do you want me to show are informed by data?
What's wrong with valuing yourself? The world owes you nothing and you are the only person who is responsible for your own well being and happiness.
Be wary of friendships which are one sided. If a person doesn't value their own person and they constantly need you to help them that's not friendship it's dependency. I've never ejected people out of my life the first time they needed help, but I have given up on people when I realized I was wasting my time. Many people who need help can only change with their own effort.
Every relationship is one of opportunity. Think about that!
/r/childfree is still a useful place for people to gain some perspective - that there are actually people who never want kids and have mostly good, personal reasons for this. Not everyone cares about the fact that other countries will likely dominate in the future. Hey, good for them.
For individuals who weigh the risks and rewards in our society it is easy to make the judgement having kids does not make sense. A lot of things we do in modern society is that individuals value their own welfare more than the welfare of the group, and are unwilling to sacrifice in exchange for the group's future prosperity. I refuse to be a disposable slave. I value my time and my life, and I am worth more long term by not taking what seems to me as stupid risks.
It is our biological imperative to reproduce, but with humanity we can rise above our animal imperatives and impulses. I choose to avoid many things which push the biological buttons.
How old are your kids? Even with the special bond parents can have with their children that's not a guarantee things will be good. I know awesome parents who have raised horrible people. I know awesome kids who turned into horrible people after they left the nest. Most people seem to eject their aging parents into nursing homes when they are too old, because people would rather live their lives than take care of their parents. Good friendships last forever and don't require you to change diapers in the early years while convincing yourself its all worth it for the few golden moments if you don't happen to be forced to miss them because of work or just chaos.
Convincing me to want to have kids would first require me being convinced that I should want to ever get married. :)
In many polls when as if people would not have kids if they could do their life again they said they would not have kids.
It's the truth. Raising children without being neglectful takes a serious amount of time and money. If you don't have the money you have to go and make the money and that means paying someone else to watch your kids to take the chance of them raising them for you.
Yes, that's the reality. Statistics of divorce say so. Not only are you likely to get divorced, as there is usually more incentive to wives to ask for one, but if you live in a state which has alimony lives you could be stuck paying money.
I'm not jaded or negative. I'm an an extremely realistic (data is emotional) person who is very excited to live life well and do a lot of great things - I live in the real world, but I'm also very optimistic with what I do choose to do.
The reality in the US is a mother can move across the country while a father is forced to pay child support, if he moves he can likely lose his well paying job, and if he can't find a just as good job where he moves he could be put into jail for non-payment (debtor's jail!).
Friends are the family you choose. I would rather go out and make good friends than hope my kids would become good friends.
I do not have kids and I do not plan to. If I had kids I would want to raise them right, and I know that I really wouldn't be able to do what I want to do in life and that.
YMMV. Not everyone wants kids, plenty of people are already having kids, many people who do have kids regret it entirely, and many people correctly recognize that you can't live your dreams and raise your kids right. It's not just a financial lens for many people it's a time lens too.
Having kids whose lives you very probably won't even be allowed to be a part of is a reality for many guys too. Even if you have kids in marriage the reality is you will probably get a divorce, the kids will go to the mother, and you will pay.
Why risk it if you know you can avoid it? Having kids it's a guarantee of joy or satisfaction. Writing books, creating epic things can give just as much joy and satisfaction.
Research on slot machine players: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1705333...
Utilitarian gamblers, in essence, are looking for something to do. Many are seniors, who are looking to kill time, reduce boredom, or simply get out of the house – and they are less motivated by financial rewards or excitement. Some enjoy people-watching as much as the actual slot play.
Excitement gamblers are looking for a buzz – the thrill of winning a jackpot, relaxing and having a good time. This group doesn’t like progressive machines with bigger payouts because they don’t pay off frequently enough to provide the excitement.
Multipurpose gamblers tend to be younger, less educated, have lower household income, and are less likely to be married and own a home. Their motivation is to have fun and win money, and they are attracted to themed games and other machines they consider “lucky” or fun to play.
Relaxation gamblers were the most educated and well-to-do, and played slot machines for the socialization and fun. However, they also like to stay within their denomination – usually 25-cent machines or $1 machines, and often look at slot play as a way to relieve day-to-day stress.