Month: March 2018

Lack of Clarity from Microsoft Will Hurt New Offensive Language Policy for Xbox One

Microsoft has revealed, buried inside a longer statement about updates to its terms of service, that the company actively prohibiting the use of offensive terms when it comes to Xbox based services on both the One console and the PC. Those who violate the new terms can be suspended and banned from their accounts and can lose access to licenses and devices.

The section of the wider update that’s most relevant for gamers reads: “In the Code of Conduct section, we’ve clarified that use of offensive language and fraudulent activity is prohibited. We’ve also clarified that violation of the Code of Conduct through Xbox Services may result in suspensions or bans from participation in Xbox Services, including forfeiture of content licences, Xbox Gold Membership time and Microsoft account balances associated with the account.”

It is commendable that Microsoft is working to limit the impact of offensive language on the gaming platforms that it manages but the company is doing a very poor job communicating about its efforts. The above statement is vague enough that the community has taken it both to mean that bans and moderation will be increased and to say that nothing will change in the actual policy and that the company is only updating the terms to make them clearer for those who might have misinterpreted before.

Toxicity, mostly related to voice and text chat and the deluge of offensive terms that some use, is a major issue for the gaming industry and many gamers claim that multiplayer experiences cannot improve it moderation, including suspensions and bans, is not improved significantly.

But before it can act Microsoft needs to become much better at communicating with those who bought and use the Xbox One or associated services on the PC. This means offering clear statements about their intentions, a list of terms that can trigger moderation and a clear goal that it wants to reach when it comes to creating a welcoming platforms for gamers to express themselves without offending others.

Comisia Naţională de fundamentare a planului naţional de adoptare a monedei euro

Un nume scurt, clar, bine definit, cum sunt probabil și planurile României de aderare la euro. “Comisia pentru adoptarea euro” e, probabil, prea simplu pentru guvernul condus de Partidul Social Democrat, care are nevoie de complexitate generatoare de confuzie în toate.

Mai interesant e că prim-ministrul Dăncilă, citată de news.ro, vrea ca liderii comisiei să fie cel sau cea care ocupă postul de lider al guvernului și președintele Academiei Române, în timp ce șeful Băncii Naționale e doar vice-președinte, alături de vice-premierul pe probleme economice. E destul de clar că cineva nu înțelege foarte clar despre ce e vorba în procesul de adoptare a euro.

Academia Română este acum condusă de Cristian Hera, specializat pe științe agricole, iar în prezidiu nu e nici un specialist în economie. E drept că o comisie și liderii ei nu reprezintă întreg efortul relevant pentru aderarea la zona euro dar modul în care un efort este structurat la început are un efect asupra modului în care evoluează.

“Comisia Naţională de fundamentare a planului naţional de adoptare a monedei euro” e dominată de executiv și nu oferă o poziție relevantă pentru BNR. E un alt exemplu de dominație a politicului și a simbolicului asupra competenței. Și un exemplu de apreciere a numelor lungi și care nu spun foarte multe lucruri.

Videogames Can Educate About Violence, Public Needs to Be Educated About Them

Violence is an inescapable element of human existence. Violent crimes, especially those involving firearms, are an inescapable fact of modern life. Videogames are becoming one of the most popular forms of entertainment of those who life this modern life. And there are plenty of people who see a direct link between titles like Call of Duty or The Evil Within and people who pick up a gun and decide to kill.

We can and we should work to reduce their impact and the incidence of violent acts in our societies but we cannot do that by finding scapegoats or by working against entire industries because of links that have not been conclusively proven by science.

The so called Videogame Summit that president Donald J. Trump conducted last week was, as reported by the Washington Post, a solid if limited attempt to see how video games developers and the people who represent their interests can interact with the political establishment in order to maybe reduce the propensity towards violence that exists in society. The meeting might have kicked off with a montage of context free shocking moments from modern titles but it’s a good sign that there was no tone of incrimination that emerged from the main participants.

There are no solid studies that show causation between violence videogames and violence in the real world but there are some, disputed but used by certain groups, showing some correlation between the two. Banning sales of titles and limiting access has already been tried and seems like a non-starter on legal grounds but the ESA, the ESRB and governments can work in order to find a way to make it easier to educate individuals about what they play, how they approach their experiences and monitor how their understanding of the world and even behavior is affected.

Panic and recrimination are not the responses that can solve a crisis but they can help stakeholders find ways to reconcile positions and find new ways to work together. In the case of violent videogames and violent acts the best idea is to educate those who create them, those who market them and those who consume them.

On its own Call of Duty (to use a name that means something even to non-gamers) will not drive someone to acquire a weapon and do something criminal. But the game coupled with conspiracy theories, limited support networks, ideologies that degrade fellow humans, unrestricted access to firepower and other factors can lead to very different and violent outcomes.

The videogame industry cannot on its own work to make sure that every player is grounded and understands that virtual violence should not be translated to the real world. But it can share information and data with the government and other groups to try and make sure that information and education is available to players and that they can make a clear distinction between what they do in Call of Duty and how they go about their lives once their exit their favorite shooter or horror title.