[vkou]

> Casinos shouldn't be regulated too. If nobody is forcing anyone to attend into something (like going to a casino or playing a pay-to-win game) nobody should have the right to change or regulate the inner dynamics.

In theory, humans are rational, and in theory, spherical cows are an excellent basis for economics.

Human brains have bugs, and these industries exploit them. It's predatory, and utterly reprehensible.

[can16358p]

Human brains have bugs, and anyone going into a casino or a pay-to-win games know what they are going into. (If they don't that's their problem for not doing their own research and using common sense before putting their money)

Human brains also have a bug around sugar consumption. I've yet to see selling people sugar or sugar-containing foods/beverages being regulated.

Human brains also have a bug making many of them social media addicts.

Human brains have so many bugs. At the end of the day regulating these businesses will hurt more people who voluntarily want to be involved than saving potential addicts.

The real solution is never preventing people from doing things (of course as long as they affect only the person and not the others' rights), instead, it's educating.

If those governments placed their efforts into educating the people about addiction mechanics of those games/casinos etc. instead of blocking/regulating altogether, it would be much more beneficial than blocking people from their own decisions.

[less_less]

> Human brains have bugs, and anyone going into a casino or a pay-to-win games know what they are going into. (If they don't that's their problem for not doing their own research and using common sense before putting their money)

"It's OK if people's lives are intentionally ruined purely for corporate profits, so long as it's at least partly those people's fault. They shouldn't let themselves be tricked."

> Human brains also have a bug around sugar consumption. I've yet to see selling people sugar or sugar-containing foods/beverages being regulated.

By the way, San Francisco taxes sugary drinks and requires them to have a warning label.

> The real solution is never preventing people from doing things (of course as long as they affect only the person and not the others' rights), instead, it's educating.

These approaches are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps it's best to find a balance between them?

[eesmith]

> San Francisco taxes sugary drinks

And see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_drink_tax .

Also, NYC tried to ban some sales of sugary beverages over 16 oz, thrown out by the courts.

[can16358p]

Ruining their lives is a bit exaggeration for playing pay to win games though.

I do not support them, I only hate the idea of banning anything more.

I believe education is the key but never see that done enough. (Not only about these topics but pretty much anything).

Banning should really, really be the last option.

[oneeyedpigeon]

> I've yet to see selling people sugar or sugar-containing foods/beverages being regulated.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugary_drink_tax#United_King...

This might not quite meet your threshold, but it's probably close. More regulation around sugar is definitely around the corner.

[can16358p]

Okay. That's a step in the right direction. Taxing might be the middle ground instead of banning something outright.