zenpundit.com

My CTLab colleague Michael Tanji is calling for participants to play a prediction market built at the old groupintel site.

Sounds good. I did this once before, a few years back with a closed Google Group but my attention wandered when the topics drifted away from my core research interests. I suspect this one will be more to my liking.

Dave “the hand of ” Munger at Cognitive Daily points to a study on the powerful effects of massive multiplayer online role playing games like World of Warcraft, Everquest, Dark Age of Camelot and others :

One type of game — one of the most popular types, in fact — hasn’t been studied nearly as much as the traditional arcade-style game: massively multiplayer online role-playing games, or MMORPGs. One of the studies of this type of game seemed to find that players weren’t more aggressive because the games foster cooperation between players.

But we’ve also heard — and seen, with Jim’s game-play, that MMORPGs like World of Warcraft can be more engaging and distracting than other games, sucking away hours and hours in seemingly endless online quests. Even if it turns out these games don’t promote violent behavior, is it possible that they have other detrimental effects?

….Sleep quality was significantly worse in the MMORPG group than the other groups, and the participants said the game interfered with their academics (although their actual academic performance didn’t suffer compared to the other groups). Yet the MMORPG group was significantly more likely than the other groups to say they planned to continue playing the game after the study was complete.

So is this behavior addictive? Smyth doesn’t offer an assessment, but the fact that the MMORPG appears to be negatively impacting several areas of these students’ lives — and that they continue to play on despite this — suggest it might be. But once again, we must be careful when generalizing results such as this. Just one MMORPG was tested, so we can’t say whether these results apply to other games. What’s more, the students clearly were getting some benefits from the game, building an online social network that was valuable to them. Despite these caveats, to me it’s surprising that such dramatic results occurred even when groups were randomly assigned to the games. Maybe nearly anyone could get “hooked.” Which is why I’m not especially interested in getting started.

We’ve known that gaming is a powerful behavioral tool since the early RAND wargaming studies, making MMORPGs a potential delivery system for education and occupational training in the 21st century

I have an op-ed/article up this morning at Pajamas Media on the Culberson-Capuano internet rules dispute:

Congress Debates Muzzling Congressmen Online

….There is certainly a legitimate and longstanding interest in preventing the misuse of federal employees or funds by prohibiting them from having any connection to campaign activities, a point on which Republicans and Democrats can easily agree. Furthermore, Capuano is correct to call the current rules “antiquated” and more restrictive, on paper at least, than his proposals. However, the old rules have been widely ignored by congressmen and have never been enforced, which left members of the House free to post online and engage in virtual interaction as they pleased. Enforcing the new, somewhat milder restrictions, as Capuano intends to do, amounts to a severe regime of prior restraint on speech.

More ominous still would be the precedent of the U.S. government designating “official” external websites – imagine having the power to select “official” newspapers – that would have to hew to House regulations and be as free as possible from political or commercial advertising. Given the ubiquity of blogads, most blogs, bulletin boards, and discussion forums would be shut out of the conversation with our nation’s elected officials. Essentially, Capuano is demanding that the internet adapt itself to the House of Representatives instead of the House adapting to the reality of the internet.

Read the rest here.

In addition to the posts on this issue this weekend by Matt Stoller and Mark Tapscott, my friend Lexington Green points to this new piece calling for a bipartisan coalition by Patrick Ruffini at The Next Right.

A larger than normal edition. Some commentary by me here and there.

Top Billing! Wizards of Oz – Decisionmaking

This was a great post by Shane that I did not comment on at the time as I was…. drinking fine whiskey in Shane’s kitchen shortly after he posted it.  A wonderful mash-up of Civil War history, von Clausewitz, Boyd, intuitive vs. conscious processing, information and organizational theories.

Selil Blog – The Socratic compass: Giving students directions not answers

The Socratic method is one of the best but seldom used tools in education – underused because it demands much from instructor and student alike and shatters beloved ideological cocoons

Austin Bay – UPDATED: Hugh Hewitt Program Today: More on Strategic Overwatch

More on this in another post next week.

Mark Tapscott – Commentary – There they go again, stifling free speech ( Hat tip Bruce Kesler)

Open Left – Following up on Capuano and House Web Restrictions (Hat tip to Jeremy)

The above gents are 180 degrees apart politically yet in complete agreement regarding Rep. Capuano’s proposed new rules for controlling the use of internet platforms by Congressmen.

Bruce Kesler –  Take HBO’s “Generation Kill” With Grain Of Salt (Update from WaPo Review)

I so do not watch television anymore that I was not even aware of this major HBO series before about an hour ago.

The Glittering Eye – Pandering, Indeed 

Smitten Eagle – SE’s Reading Program

Reading programs are wonderful intellectual tools – another one that has fallen into disuse among educators outside of grad school seminars.

Thomas P.M. Barnett – A war that nobody wants but everybody needs

David Ignatius – An Army That Learns ( Hat tip SWJ Blog)

LTC Nagl must be smiling.

James Joyner – Obama Plunges in Newsweek Poll!

Abu Muqawama (Charlie) – Women in COIN (Dept. of Shameless Self-promotion)

Charlie highlights a good bio piece on rising COIN experts like McFate.

Insurgency Research Group – COIN Inside the Wire – Jihadist Rehabilitation in Saudi Arabia

A must read post.

CTLab ( Chesney) – The Tension Between Prosecution and Gathering Intelligence

I’m very impressed with the the aggressive team-building at CTLab. More on this next week.

Fabius Maximus – The most expensive psy-war campaign – ever!

Batting clean up today. 🙂

Cheryl Rofer of Whirledview has called for a blog tank on the strategic question of countries with just a few nuclear weapons:

Blog Tank: National Strategy for a Few Nuclear Weapons

Herman Kahn worked out the strategies for massive nuclear exchanges between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Both the United States and Russia are now disassembling their nuclear weapons, rather than building more. The nations that have tens or hundreds of nuclear weapons are looking fairly peaceful lately; even India and Pakistan seem to have achieved their own version of the balance of terror. Terrorists don’t seem to have any nukes hidden away yet.

So the danger is that a nation will break out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty with a few nukes. This is a very different problem from the one Kahn addressed.

The last country to face an analogous situation was the United States at the end of World War II. By the time it had tested an implosion device at Alamogordo, New Mexico, and dropped weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was out of atomic bombs and fissionable materials. Truman bluffed for the several years it took to build some tens of nuclear weapons.

That was, of course, when no other nations had nuclear weapons.

Andy at Nuclear Mangoes reminded me over the weekend of my irritation that nobody has addressed the strategy of one to a few nuclear weapons. That’s a different problem than something in the range of 5-10, which is a different problem from a higher number. None of these have been addressed systematically for today’s world.

So let’s have a blog tank. Anyone who wants to participate should post a scenario (or scenarios) on their blog or, if you don’t have a blog, in the comments to this post. Here is the problem I want to address:

What strategies are available to a country with fissionable material sufficient for 1-5 nuclear weapons, some of which may be assembled? Take into account probable responses, and assume some sort of rationality on the holders of these weapons and material. You may specifically refer to Iran and North Korea, or any other nation, or make the scenario(s) more general. Flesh out the scenario with some support.

I envision a next step after the scenarios have been presented, perhaps a mutual critique, but I am open to suggestions on that next step. Let’s keep this first round to scenario development.

I’ll pull things together, as I did the last time around. I won’t try to reconcile one scenario with another, although I may note similarities.

Deadline for scenarios: July 18.

This is a great idea. I see that Shane has already responded but I will look more closely at his post here on Sunday.