Eventually the whole army is going to be drone pilots, so does it really matter? :p

Uh, what does that prove?
Even the anti-gaming nuts aren't saying gaming makes us physically fit, which is all the article is covering.
And anti-gaming nuts are certainly going to jump all over that "understanding of technology" line.

Note: I don't agree with anti-gaming nuts who think that video games somehow train us to be better at shooting or whatever, and I certainly don't think they desensitize us to violence (real life is very different). I just don't see this article winning any arguments.


EDIT: I am of course, assuming of the point you were trying to make, if you're saying gaming in general is making us fatter, well then the article does help

Actually the article on NPR (linked from the one I linked) has more, but they are specifically not only talking about physical fitness.

I attended a lecture by a cs professor who's researching the use of video game creation (interactive storytelling) as a high school/jr high teaching medium. The boys in his sample group played 30 hours of video games a week (mean) and 9 hours of social networking. Even if we assume they're only getting 9 hours of sleep a night (and for a teenage boy that's a pretty low guess) and spending 6 hours a day at school, that only leaves them 36 hours a week for EVERYTHING ELSE. Homework, real life socialization, sports, reading, TV, walking the dog, chores... everything.

THIS is what the article proves, guys. It's not about the video games, or the TV, or anything else. We have created a society where people are robbed of their self-control to increase profit and these are the consequences.

Precious Snowflake Syndrome is anathema to an effective military.

Why are things like reading and sports not in the same catagory as TV and video games? Why do participating in the latter two mean we have no self-control but the first two don't?

Because modern is wrong, everything new is bad for society.

Well, most sports at least have some sort of physical activity, and no, waving your arms around like a moron while playing wii doesn't count.

Regarding reading, there is a huge difference between reading a novel or a biography than reading snippets on joystiq.com (unless you stick to grade-school level stuff, I guess).

It's all relative. I'd rate a documentary on the history channel as more productive than another rerun of Friends. I'd rate most video games right next to watching movies -- I don't think the "puzzle solving" counts as straining your brain (although this is my experience with most action/adventure/rpg/rts games, there are probably some that help you learn something useful, but CoD, not so much).

There are definitely people obsessed with sports and reading to an unhealthy degree, but I don't think the problem is as common as video games and tv.

Don't get me wrong, I freaking LOVE video games. I love watching movies and tv shows. I think the point is that these have gone from being pastimes to being the primary activities for a lot of kids.

Well, I think it's partly because with video games there's no end to a gaming session. You can stay awake for a long time and pump entertainment into your brain for like 10 or 15 hours at a time. I remember when I first played Fallout 3 it was too much fun. I had just graduated from college and hadn't been hired so I basically did nothing but play it for four or five days (we're talking like 10 hour sessions at least). Fortunately I realized what a colossal loser I was being and quit before it got really out of hand.

While I guess you could technically waste time with those other two activities I've always found reading and sports to have limits. Reading takes mental concentration and sports takes both mental and physical endurance. For example, after a three hour ice hockey session I've got nothing left in the tank. I'm physically incapable of playing any more.

This rings true for me because I'm a musician. If I had have spent as much time playing guitar as I have playing video games I'd probably be one of the best musicians in North America. This is probably the main reason I'm trying to give all of mine away: I just don't want to waste any more time.

Of course, the argument is incorrect, because playing video games doesn't mean you have no self-control. As long as you don't let your gaming ruin your life, it's okay in moderation.

Why are things like broccoli and cucumbers not in the same category as burgers and fries?

Because self-control means moderation.

Gebohq, as an anonymous internet person you probably don't believe me, but I seriously - honestly - think you should talk to a psychiatrist about borderline personality disorder. This is like the third or fourth time you've read one of my posts to mean I endorse the extreme opposite of whatever I'm criticizing. The world doesn't work that way. Honestly, man, get help.

?

Are you...running out of insults or something?

No, I'm not kidding.

...

I honestly don't know how to reply. I'll just see if anyone else has anything to say about this.

You're a loon, go to the looney bin, you looney!

I was and still am confused by JonC's post. You're saying 36 hours a week isn't enough?

Joncey is projecting. Don't worry about it.

That's ridiculous. I had to read your post a couple times to get your point. It wasn't very clear.

This is the second time in about a week that Brian's posted a thread and I've had no idea what it's about. Ordinarily I'd suspect that this is my fault, but I don't have this problem with most posters' threads.

Yeah, I'm not sure about that either considering that averages out to about 5 hours a day. Jon'C's problem is he's a little too highbrow for us and needs to explain some of his views more simply for people like us (this isn't a jab, I believe that to be true).

However, considering how bizarre our lives have become now I think I might be able to at least guess to some of his opinions on the subject. People never used to spend the amount of time we do now on non-productive and anti-social behavior. People used to eat as a family more, watch programs as a group, use a landline telephone when they needed to talk, etc. All of the unproductive behavior we didn't have any access to in the past has now become the most convenient to access. For example, it is far easier to engage in pointless discussions on Massassi than seek healthful social contact or engage in activities that increase our self-worth, intellect, or real physical social value.

As to the topic, I can whole heartedly tell all here that the quality of your military is diminishing each and every year. I think we went through a period during the 80s and 90s where quality increased but now it is certainly in decline.

Based on what? Ability to blow **** up? Victories? Mistakes made?

Based upon the quality of the people I have served with for the past 21 years and what I know of the improvements post draft.

Isn't that just anecdotal?

I said our country was raising a generation of sissies. A bunch of people whined that I was sexist and had severe masculinity problems. I started this thread to point out that the US Army shares my view.

Because you are sexist and you do have masculinity problems.
You are Red Forman, except you aren't in a TV show.

Just wait until the army isn't allowed to discriminate against gays anymore.

Ahh, of course!


Though... linking to an article concerning the army doesn't necessarily help against sexism and masculinity accusations >_>

I am going to wholeheartedly agree with SSgt (SFC? I don't know now) Wookie. It took me about a month in boot camp to realize that our armed forces are a ****ing joke these days.

And then I went to Iraq. Dear god. The number of times I should have died because of some ******* Master Sergeant or Major's career minded attitude, or some Lance Private's cock sucking and juvenile mindset, ****, it just boggles the mind.

I will refrain from griping specifically about my chain of command. Well, any more specifically, because I like to think I am marginally more professional than the people I work for. But I would just like to point towards the spiraling drug and alcohol abuse rates to demonstrate the problem our military is dealing with. Start with lower quality people and it's just a ****ed situation.

Also, I invite anyone over to my house to see the long term effects of being in our current day military. Particularly on a drill weekend or before any one of us goes to a school or something.

**** yeah. It's less about kids being less masculine and being sissys (probably a bigger problem in the Army, honestly) and more about people being ****ing sociopaths with no redeeming value as a human being.

Oh, yeah, but that's just anecdotal.

Yeah, of course you're going to get people like that. Opportunistic people who want power, or people who literally could not get a job doing anything else.

The US military used to be pretty brainy: around the Vietnam war, the majority of volunteers were university-educated and from moderately affluent families. This has changed since the Vietnam war, though. Today most recruitment is from the bottom two income (and educational) quintiles. I've never read a good explanation, but I've read at least a couple of articles talking about it.

If you march enough stupid people into hail of gun fire they eventually create this really neat wall for the smarter people to hide behind.

Well, the terms seem far too vague for me to get top tiered search results however I must, generally, call BS on Jon'C's assertion. The US military, in general, has relatively high standards. By that, I mean compared to the private sector which, obviously, encompasses everyone else. It seems pretty idiotic to actually assert that until post-Vietnam most military members were university educated. Standards have generally tightened during the years of an all volunteer service although I can state that many, many exceptions have been made in the past seven or so years. Waiving such criteria as having a diploma, passing the ASVAB with a 31 (not the same as 31%), and of course moral and other criteria. Fortunately those standards have tightened back up in the past year or so as more people are joining and staying in due to the weak economy.

I highly doubt that most of the soldiers during vietnam had bachelors degrees. Yes, you could maybe assume that more did considering there was a draft in place, but I highly doubt that the majority did. Keep in mind that during the Vietnam war you could join the Army/Marines as a replacement for prison if you had be convicted of various crimes.



EDIT
(woops -- you said volunteers :/ mah bad)

Why not look up some statistics?

Because i'm not the one who made the claims in question! People should start citing or somethin

One of my platoon sergeants joined as an sentence option.

How long has he been in because joining the military as a condition for dismissing criminal charges that has been a disqualification for quite awhile. I guess without knowing the year he joined it would be hard to say but the Army, Air Force, and Marines have been prohibitted from admitting people with that condition for sometime. Apparantly Naval regulations don't preclude it but in practice Navy recruiters are similarly prohibited from enlisting people in that situation. Most likely his recruiter hid the condition unless he's a real old school Marine.

I don't think he was in particularly long. He wasn't in the invasion, but was in Al Anbar in ~04 He joined from New York City, so I can certainly see some recruiter pulling some strings and hiding it. I'm sure you know it's unfortunately standard for recruiters to tell their prospects to lie at MEPS.

Point is, the service still generally comes from the, um, 'lower end'.

Granted, if **** ever went down real hard, I would want him in charge of me.

Thing is the background checks they run now are hard to fool. However if a recruiter (illegally) gets the court to word things in certain ways so as to show the case completely resolved with no reference to the military then that may work. Thing is, many DAs and judges are rightfully learly of doing so since nobody can be compelled to join the military.

As I've said, the past six years or so saw an increase in substandard individuals because the military had to waive many qualifications or lower standards. More moral waivers, education waivers, tatoo waivers, etc. Fortunately that is not so much the case anymore.