The insane spending sprees/binges shrink a lot, when they are expressed in "how much vacuuming and floor washing am I willing to endure?"
Have you ever read "Punished by Rewards" by Alfie Kohn? He states that rewarding for the things you mentioned inhibits the desired behavior in the long run.
However even though most people don't enjoy their work we must learn to get past that in order to achieve our goals, might as well learn this early imo.
Personally I hated most of school, pretty much every subject that wasn't math or programming. Rewards did motivate me to learn those things I didn't like.
So maybe only reward them for doing stuff they already don't like doing but would be good for them. If you see your kid doing well in math but poorly in history only reward them for history.
There's a reason everyone isn't driving a Honda Civic.
Everyone has their thing. I'm sure you spend money in ways that are just as puzzling to others.
Key is proper financial management. If I make $10000 post tax (which isnt an impressive figure for a community like this), put 15% in savings, 30% in rent/utilities, and 5% into food, I still have $5000 left. Spending $500 on games won't really phase me.
I 100% agree this isn't something kids would do and balance, though. And I recognize others have addictions and much worse financial planning.
Tons of really great stuff in eastern work culture that I miss now back in europe. But that "results-first and call it a systematic right" thing never sat well with me.
Source?
>Meanwhile, Chinese and Korean kids widely DEMAND pay to win, and see people who complain about Pay2Win as "Losers in life", because, to them, it's just two valid paths, and if someone pays to win at a game, then it's just a mark of status. Btw, did you also know that parents in central china have protested over the right to cheat?
The article says:
>In response, angry parents and students championed their right to cheat. Not cheating, they said, would put them at a disadvantage in a country where student cheating has become standard practice. “We want fairness. There is no fairness if you do not let us cheat,” they chanted.
The comment is claiming cheating is "a mark of status" and "just two valid paths", whereas in the qz article parents wanted to cheat because not cheating would put them at a disadvantage. Those aren't really comparable, because in the latter case they're presumably not supporting cheating in and of itself, only because they don't want to be put at a disadvantage. A parallel would be how in the US, democrats are against voter ID laws, because it would disadvantage minority voters. They don't (presumably) want election fraud (although republicans do think so), they just don't want a regime where their side is disadvantaged.
And if you read my last comment more carefully, I wasn't faulting you, only the original characterization.
>If you wanted to discuss whether cheating is good in this specific scenario, you should have put that as your comment to the parent.
I think it's fair game to call the claim misleading, even if the parents are technically protesting for the right to cheat, for the reasons outlined in my previous comment. Again, going back to the example of democrats being against voter ID law, it would be misleading to characterize that as "democrats protesting for the right to commit vote fraud", even though they're technically supporting making election fraud easier.
When I was younger and still played online games regularly, I was initially stoked about cosmetic micro-transactions in (competitive) online games. Not because I wanted to buy them, but because these would fund the continuous development of my favorite games without affecting their integrity (no "pay to win" mechanisms).
Later I found this was a Faustian bargain. It turned these games and communities around them into something that I don't want to participate in.
These days I don't mind as much. Because among the sea of predatory, tacky or otherwise low quality crap there are way too many high quality, original and interesting games (typically made by small teams) that I will ever be able to play.
I don't know anything about Roblox specifically. On one hand the comment above is tragic, but on the other hand my understanding is that motivates kids to play around with Lua. If that's the case, then I'm all for it, because for me and many others that kind of thing is how we found our way into our profession as developers.
And yes, Factorio is great.
She would play games and want Robux. So she would go on her iPad and download iPad games that pay out Robux. The iPad games are total junk that only pay Robux after my kid watches ads. Some of those ads are for crappy games that pay Robux. Repeat the cycle.
I was appalled by the whole thing and deleted Roblox. She has gone back to Minecraft and does not seem to miss Roblox.
Addiction triggers and reward center abuse. This, to me, is no different than bright slot machines.
these are gambling mechanics... if I just pay $1 more I can make it to the end! if you pay $5 you can be better than everyone else! if I buy just one more lucky box it will have the rare item!
arcades had this, but they also had additional friction as a physical location... now little timmy can sit at home every waking hour badgering mom for another quarter to put into the machine and there's the social pressure of bobby and mary having the exclusive $10 youtuber hat
all the typical trappings of life exaggerated and optimized to extract money in exchange for good vibes... from children
Nope, that was the decade prior. I guess Street Fighter would be a better example where it monetized both ways. Eat quarters at the arcade, or spend $200 in 1980s moneys for the NES/SNES and anywhere from $50-80 for the full version. The arcade in many ways was as much an ad for "well you know can play this at home 24/7!"as much as an quarter muncher.
>all the typical trappings of life exaggerated and optimized to extract money in exchange for good vibes... from children
I'm not opposed to rating it M. But all those kids on COD and GTA tell me that that won't be the silver bullet that solves everything. At some level the parent needs to intervene and not buy that for them (like me for GTA).
Of course the key here is that kids don't always get what they want when asked. I don't understand how some kids can just get unfettered access to a credit card and spend hundreds on such stuff.
Easy.
Step 1: Find where your parents leaves their wallet lying around because they don't expect their child to attempt credit fraud.
Step 2: Punch in the numbers on the card into the appropriate boxes in the app because tech companies really don't have a interest in putting up any real barriers to prevent kids from spending money.
Step 3: Profit!
1. My parent was careful with money. every transaction would be tracked, so anything unusual like Robux would show up quick.
2. 99% of the time a CC would be in a purse or bedroom. Both strictly off limits unless permission was granted (or emergency)
3. I was on general pretty much only allowed to use any allowance (which wasn't much) for food or the occasional school supply. Anything else would require permission. Money given was for necessities, not leisure.
It could just be the outliers popping up in news. But I just can't imagine so many social barriers breaking down over a video game.
I don't think this is a major break down of society type of thing, more of something modern parents need to be aware of since making a lot of ill advised app purchases seems to be becoming one of those things all children end up doing at least once before being taught not to (or finding out the consequences of disobeying).