Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission Summary: 0 pending, 5 declined, 1 accepted (6 total, 16.67% accepted)

Earth

+ - Walmart starting 'Green' labeling consortium->

Submitted by tonyreadsnews
tonyreadsnews (1134939) writes "After pushing RFID, looks like Wal-Mart has another agenda to push. (print friendly version).
Something like this (if done right) could put the ecological impact the products right in front of consumers when they buy. That way when you buy the cheaper product made in a country with lower environmental requirements, the impact is available to you. With so many companies saying that they are 'green', its difficult to know whether one brand or company is environmentally better.
For instance, from the article

PepsiCo (PEP, news, msgs) buys lots of renewable energy, while a Coca-Cola (KO, news, msgs) plant recycles plastic bottles. Should environmentalists drink Pepsi or Coke?

Something like this could also put the power of choice between 'cheap' and 'environmentally friendly' in the hands of the consumers for a market driven force. Currently, there is very little way for consumers to 'vote with dollars' for the more sustainable product simply because they have no way of knowing the impact.
Of course, if done wrong, it will be one more meaningless marketing gimmick for companies to tout as each seek to manipulate the data to get the results they want."

Link to Original Source

Editorial

+ - Thinking of the Children, really->

Submitted by
tonyreadsnews
tonyreadsnews writes "Usually, "Thinking of the children" is a starting point to impose limitations on video games and internet in general. For once, a study requested by UK's Prime Minister seems to be a bit more objective then most.

In the Executive Summary it points out that

Children and young people need to be empowered to keep themselves safe — this isn't just about a top-down approach. Children will be children — pushing boundaries and taking risks. At a public swimming pool we have gates, put up signs, have lifeguards and shallow ends, but we also teach children how to swim.

I think that is an important point that most studies miss, that just "thinking of the children" and locking the bad stuff away is actually setting them up for failure later in life.
Some other good quotes from the summary:

As we increasingly keep our children at home because of fears for their safety outside — in what some see as a 'risk-averse culture' — they will play out their developmental drives to socialize and take risks in the digital world.
Another, implies that that the uniqueness of children would require that parents take an individualized approach and "parent their children":

We need to take into account children's individual strengths and vulnerabilities, because the factors that can discriminate a 'beneficial' from a 'harmful' experience online and in video games will often be individual factors in the child. The very same content can be useful to a child at a certain point in their life and development and may be equally damaging to another child. That means focusing on the child
I don't agree with everything that is suggested, but for a study for a government agency, it seems better then average to me.
Direct link to the full PDF http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview/pdfs/Final%20Report%20Bookmarked.pdf"

Link to Original Source
First Person Shooters (Games)

+ - Not the best parenting?->

Submitted by tonyreadsnews
tonyreadsnews (1134939) writes "Ok, this CNN story is pretty bad about a mom buying guns for her kid to "indulge" him.
The part about the DA saying "This is not the best parenting I've ever seen, obviously...", I think could qualify for understatement of the year.

The kid had a "rifle, about 30 air-powered guns, swords, knives, grenades" among some other stuff.

It's not tech, but I'll bet if the kid had done anything, they'd have blamed it first on videogames."

Link to Original Source
XBox (Games)

+ - Halo 3 Psychological Testing->

Submitted by
tonyreadsnews
tonyreadsnews writes "I found it interesting at NPR [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14649338] that they used psychologists to analyze how game players felt about the game. It's an audio story, but well worth the listen.

This may not be the first time its ever been used, but it was the first time I had heard of it. Maybe this could be an addition to the previous articles of "how to make a great game"?"

Link to Original Source

What this country needs is a good five cent microcomputer.

Working...