Though I hate to agree with shrinks, most believe these days that one CAN get addicted to video games, at least psychologically. Basically, just like gambling, same effect, same thing going on in the brain, and just as hard to kick. Basically, if it is having a detrimental effect on his life, health, both physical and/or mental, and if this person is someone you care about, a friend, there is sadly, very little you can do. Trust me, talking doesn't help, telling them they are ruining their life does less than help. I am a recovering addict, I know. Pretty much the only thing you CAN do is perhaps an intervention, talk to his family, other friends, find substance abuse councilor and get advice from them. ANY aa,NA, rehab center will have a good list of people who know about this, call them. Basically, you have to treat it like a gambling addiction. If you really are concerned, the best bet is his family and a councilor, together maybe you can get him to at least think about the fact that he might have a problems. Realistically though, if someone does have a problem like this, there is little one can do unless the person is willing to seek help. It is a helpless feeling I know.

gravy! Needs to be open-faced with some good pork gravy, Then it would be perfect.

Begin Rhetorical Question>> The thing that confuses me... the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology? Evolutionary Anthropology would be pretty low on my list if I was going to list things associated with Max Plank. Why on earth did they name an Anthropology Institute after a Theoretical Physicist? Don't get me wrong, Plank is one of the great names in physics, and one of the most brilliant men to have lived in the 20th Century... but Anthropology?!? Is there some connection between evolution and Quantumn Mechanics I seem to have missed in all those years in College? End Rhetorical Question

I worked at one point for a computer magazine, and the editors/writer had quite a bit of leeway when managing there own systems, since it was part of there job to test software etc. Though they should have used the test machine, that really did not happen often. But even these smart, very tech-educated people often killed their machines.
There is just no way a user, no matter how saavy they are, can keep up with the potential conflicts, problems, incompatabilities etc of every piece of hardware and software they have. That is WHY IT departments even exist. Too many times I had evil meltdowns on machines where the user THOUGHT they knew what they were doing.

In some cases, some leeway might be granted, but only on strict limits. I understand why some companies might think this would save money or time, but this will change as soon as someone looses mission critical data.

It really is the tech saavy user who is the most dangerous, because they do not know how much they actually don't know. Most other users are too afraid to play around with their machines cause they are afraid they will kill it. That is a good thing.