Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

redcross.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 253 posts

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#131

Post by throwaway894345 »

hourislate wrote: post #81
throwaway894345 wrote: post #13

> In an increasingly uncertain world, this protective use of the red cross emblem has become more and more important. In the past ten years, there have been 162 fatalities among Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement personnel including two Canadians. I don't understand how these two sentences are related and the article doesn't explain it as far as I can tell. They seem to be vaguely insinuating that video games approp…

Trying putting the whole article in context instead of picking apart two sentences. What they're saying is that the Red Cross Emblem is being watered down, so much so that it's losing it's symbolism of humanitarian protection status and impartiality and as such are becoming a target in conflict zones.

> Trying putting the whole article in context instead of picking apart two sentences. What they're saying is that the Red Cross Emblem is being watered down, so much so that it's losing it's symbolism of humanitarian protection status and impartiality and as such are becoming a target in conflict zones.

Wow that's a lot of snark.

1. I did read the entire article, I just didn't quote it all because that's not what quotes are for. Note that the site guidelines advise against accusations of not reading TFA.

2. "as such are becoming a target in conflict zones." So basically the absurd "videogames thus killings" argument that I addressed in my original post?

3. I got a couple dozen upvotes in a few minutes, so I'm not the only one confused by this.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#132

Post by kerng »

What the post fails to highlight is what causes problems or why is it an issue?

E.g. it sounds like people died because of it? Why?

I'm not sure I follow - isnt it a good thing that the emblem is widely recognized and used, so everyone know what it stands for help/medicine/first aid/dont shoot, etc...

Or does it mean soemthing else?

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#133

Post by psyc »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #73
m1117 wrote: post #7

Games is the mirror of the real world. Also, games are art. You can't judge GTA for bringing people joy of killing virtual people.

You can certainly judge GTA for that.

I do judge GTA. I judge it to be the greatest AAA series of all time.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#134

Post by crooked-v »

tyingq wrote: post #46
mushufasa wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If video games or art or movies are depicting the appropriate scenarios, such as a scene involving army medics, wouldn't that be a constructive use of the symbol? It would spread awareness and education. A green cross would confuse people.

That's where I'm confused. I see the issue with products appropriating it as a sort of brand hijacking...like the example of a first aid kit with a red cross. But tv, movies, games, etc, just showing an accurate representation of real life, within the media itself seems...normal. I think if they have to, the least confusing thing would be a red square with a white cross inside it. That's what a lot of first aid kits…

> an accurate representation of real life

In real life, the symbol is pretty strictly limited to a specific international organization well-known for their neutrality in armed conflict. Portraying it as just meaning 'healing' takes away from the power of that neutrality.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#135

Post by throwaway894345 »

addicted wrote: post #124
Vaslo wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there were video games in 1935 that caused the Dolo air strike? I think the issue is around why (or whether) video games cause this, not if there were ever assholes who tried to bomb them.

Except they aren’t claiming that it’s only video games. They’ve only mentioned it as one avenue of misuse.

Is there any evidence at all that misuse from video games or any other kind of media have contributed to any of these fatalities?

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#137

Post by MattRix »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #72
chomp wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they are insinuating that. I think they are claiming that pulling the Red Cross into public domain dilutes its symbolism from the neutral humanitarian organization they intend it to stand for, to "generic medical symbol potentially used by anyone", which could potentially open personnel up to violence.

This is an extraordinary naive comment. Claim is stronger than insinuate . claim: verb (used with object) to demand by or as by virtue of a right; demand as a right or as due insinuate: verb (used with object) to suggest or hint slyly Sometimes one is forced to wonder if some people actually read what they write, or listen to what they say.

Gotta love how you misread their comment and then accused them of not reading what they wrote.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#138

Post by johncolanduoni »

yellow_lead wrote: post #45

> Under the Charter Act that was adopted in 1900 under the Geneva Convention (and later amended in 1905 and again in 1910)3, the American Red Cross has the exclusive right to use a red Greek cross4 on a white field, with the only exception being that any user of such an emblem prior to 1905 would continue to have the right to use the emblem. Registrations owned by Johnson & Johnson for red Greek crosses date from 190…

I feel like putting more burden on the red cross to police their “trademark” instead of their primary mission is a massive waste considering what that mission is. And the symbol is inherently common because the main place the average person sees it (on ambulances and hospitals) is actually an intended and authorized use of the symbol per the Geneva convention.

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#139

Post by anoncake »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #13

> In an increasingly uncertain world, this protective use of the red cross emblem has become more and more important. In the past ten years, there have been 162 fatalities among Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement personnel including two Canadians. I don't understand how these two sentences are related and the article doesn't explain it as far as I can tell. They seem to be vaguely insinuating that video games approp…

Has the world ever not been "increasingly uncertain"?

Re: It may just be a game to you, but it means the world to us

#140

Post by bingidingi »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #131
hourislate wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying putting the whole article in context instead of picking apart two sentences. What they're saying is that the Red Cross Emblem is being watered down, so much so that it's losing it's symbolism of humanitarian protection status and impartiality and as such are becoming a target in conflict zones.

> Trying putting the whole article in context instead of picking apart two sentences. What they're saying is that the Red Cross Emblem is being watered down, so much so that it's losing it's symbolism of humanitarian protection status and impartiality and as such are becoming a target in conflict zones. Wow that's a lot of snark. 1. I did read the entire article, I just didn't quote it all because that's not what quo…

The argument is that diluting the mark can cause confusion, and that confusion can cause death.

"Videogames cause death" feels like a bad-faith oversimplification of the point they're trying to make. It's understandable, as video games are often wrongly attributed as creating violence... but that's not what they're saying.

They don't want video games to stop representing medics, for example... they just don't want the red cross to be synonymous with health, because it's much more specific than that.

Post reply on HN