aspeeder

Back when I killed vyrewatches around your levels (No high pray or herb, low 90's melee) I brought a bunyip, a super set, a spec wep. (I forget which, but decide whether you need healing or dps when you're there), and an entire invy of monks. I'd be eating around one monk for every kill, trying to get the lower leveled vyres, and it worked out pretty well. Just bring tanking gear, no prayers required, though piety and such would almost certainly speed up your kills there I can't advise about it since that's not the method I used. Best of luck!

Why would they need to emigrate? The original researched article by The Guardian, which, by the way, never mentions anything about prisons – features some genuine investigative reporting where they actually went to China and did some talking to real people. Ok, except this isn't the article we're talking about. Li Hua isn't the same as the pseudonym Liu Dali used by the prisoner. Oh, and nice debasing of a legitimate source by claiming that they're not a real person. Classy. I don't know about other online games, but it's very easy to limit communication in RS. You simply lie about your age and get limited to quickchat only. It still allows you a modicum of outside communication, which China is very strict about banning entirely. They could easily monitor chat logs and brutally punish anyone who attempts to communicate, even a real time keylogger could inform guards midway through the prisoner typing any kind of offensive messages. So no, they wouldn't have to allow a modicum of outside communication. In fact, they could just physically alter the keyboards to only allow the prisoners to do the outlined tasks. WASD, space bar, numbers for hotkeys, and a mouse and you're all set. Again with the "sleep deprivation" and "torture" drama -- NONE of which is mentioned in the original article. You're extrapolating ideas that aren't there. As I said before, stop letting your imagination run wild with you and read what is IN the article, and don't offer your own interpretation of it as being "factual" evidence of anything. It's your "opinion" -- it is neither fact nor evidence of anything. You know, there is such a thing as subtly of language. For instance, you may find this New Yorker article about the Church of Scientology lacks an outright objective condemnation of the Church. Yet, by carefully diminishing the credibility of some sources and through a well-crafted tone he built an effective criticism of the entire operation. Now don't get me wrong, this article is not on par with the writing of the New Yorker by any stretch, but the article does convey information without telling us like we're 4th graders. I do not need to take a leap of faith to equate "And when the sun went down, he was set down in front of a computer and forced to play videogames. In addition to forcing inmates to preform tough manual labor, the prison had discovered the lucrative business of gold farming" with goldfarming in addition to manual labor, which would lead to sleep deprivation. We're all operating at some level of literacy, but often writing isn't black and white or perfectly in-your-face about what it's trying to say. Haha, free and open vote by the citizens of China to oppose and claim that the government there is illegitimate. You make me laugh. This short essay lists numerous ways the government claims legitimacy, but authority vested therein by the people through a representative government isn't one of them. That idea, that governments claim legitimacy through the consent of the governed is purely a Western ideal, and though I (And I do believe you too, since you invoked it) think it's probably the best system thus far the Chinese government does not claim that as one of its sources of legitimacy. And going by those ideals which we seem to have in common, this article also demonstrates the lack of populous-based legitimacy there.

Ok, now you're actually posting sources, and you know what? Sure, I can believe that this story is a bit sketchy. And until more articles appear it'll be hard to determine whether this practice was/is widespread or not. But I still cannot believe your insensitivity towards this whole issue. Even in the second article you posted the author said: Even to a respectable journalist who doubts this story, he had empathy towards the prisoners and did not outright mock them. "Misery"? What misery? 12-hours of ALLEGED video gaming is misery as compared to what, exactly? You haven't been able to provide an adequate comparative that can demonstrate how video gaming is "torture", nor have you been able to provide irrefutable proof that it was "torture". I don't know how often we've repeated that these can be a tool for sleep deprivation and psychological torture, so I'll ask you this: what is your definition of torture? Because it seems to me that your definition is largely confined to the physical, but I might be wrong; it's obvious that neither side here is making any headway right now so it'd be best to at least know exactly where we stand. First of all, the article you cited does not call it tortue, but this one does, and this one is tagged under torture. I'm sure various websites edited the article somewhat to fit their perceived audience. And, as posted earlier, China isn't exactly all about the freedom of the press.

Funny how you reply to something about torture while you support a government that tortured thousands. If you're referring to his avatar, communist=/=Stalinist, or Maoist for that matter; there's never been a "truly" communist government. I'm not pro-communist, just clarifying.

It's not like they have competitors to check the price levels, they're probably just toeing the line to see what the most profitable mix of sales numbers and profit per sale is.

grammer doesnt real but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like for to dungeoneer? i cannot comprehend your message. It's a meme.

They're probably raging because they spent the 100mil+ gp on 95 prayer and aren't seeing the gamebreaking difference they expected. If they spend 100mil+ they have the right to tear through everything else, and if they don't they'll whine the others are being unfair :rolleyes: .

Plus it's better to level up more consistently than to power through a bunch of charms at once. Less capital required upfront, and makes training a bit more bearable.

Let's please not go down this route, it's rude, unnecessary, destroys your credibility, and we're discussing ideas not people here. Bly, I don't agree with most of what you've said here, but I'll apologize for this kind of behavior.

Ok...then you're clearly a troll. If you didn't care at all you wouldn't post, unless you gained enjoyment from pissing me off; hence a troll. I didn't post to piss anyone off. I saw something funny, and that I sided with somebody, and so I posted such. If you don't like my view or opinion, that's your prerogative. Right, but you also talked about starting a flame war. I was saying that if you truly did not give a [cabbage] you wouldn't have posted. Since you did you either do care about the actual discussion at hand, or about sharing your sense of humor. Do some [bleep]ing research. Here's a snippet for you: "500,000 Number of people believed to be in arbitrary detention at any given time in China." Besides, because of the lack of transparency that I stated before (That you did not respond to) keeps us from knowing the crimes most of the prisoners committed. And if you're making a generalization based off of the US prison system, you have a lot to learn. Most of the prisoners in the US system committed drug offenses based on our horribly ineffective War on Drugs Policy. Read my post about the definition of playing, and how what these prisoners are doing couldn't be defined as "play" by any stretch of the imagination.

No, you give up your liberties not your rights.

http://thesaurus.com/browse/enforce, yes they can have varied meaning and connotations but they can't be THAT dissimilar if they're synonyms. Further, it wasn't just the UN providing the refugees with services. He used connections to force the government to provide basic health care to the refugees; I don't know what more you want than a show of force to consider an action to be enforcing. That's still not enforcement but rather a temporary relief. Theoretically, you could argue that, say, peacekeeping is likewise an enforcement of the U.N. mandate but it isn't. All they can do is keep parties at arm's-length from each other and hope they learn to get along. You're still not enforcing "Universal Human Rights" though you're merely offering a reprieve from the current conditions. If those conditions are extraordinarily worse in terms of Human Rights, I would consider them enforcing those rights even in the worst circumstances. And from what I can tell your idea of international enforcement basically boils down to military interventionism, and under that definition I wouldn't want any international organization to have broad enforcing powers. But enforcement through diplomacy or sanctions can also be effective; political power doesn't have to grow from the barrel of a gun. I get that you were criticizing it on a broader scale, and yes these things are much harder to implement without a decent infrastructure. But the fact remains that China is capable of providing these rights, but remains unwilling to. I am interested in this dichotomy you're talking about, if you'd feel more open you could just pm me. I'll add it here under a spoiler: Considering that the man in question was trying to root out corruption, something that is a net negative to any society, it's hard to argue that the man's Universal Rights wouldn't also affect society in a positive manner. Rights for the individual may be a detriment to the government, but the government is not the same thing as society. I'd hardly consider this "getting wild" over, everything has just become embroiled since you openly mocked torture victims. And as Dan pointed out, why do you get to dictate what is important and what isn't. And further, why shouldn't we add this to the list of China's atrocities? It's one more claim to lay against them. "One more claim ..." Is it? On the grand scale of claims, is it one more? All through this debate, you and others have been trying to assert that this punishment is some form of torture, based largely off, what I can plainly see, as a diversion from the actual facts. Sure, the writer tried to make the article seem meatier somewhat exciting but the actual plugged in information from the original source doesn't back up the half-baked claims that the story purports to relate. In the end, you're still left asking the same question: is playing video games torture? The answer to which is an unequivocal "no" ... Yes it is one more, it'd be better to make a marginal claim than not too. And you've still been ignoring something: they aren't playing video games. Playing by definition means: to engage in activity for enjoyment and recreation rather than a serious or practical purpose. They are interacting with world of warcraft to make real world money, that's a practical purpose. And on the individual level he's complying so he won't be beaten, and I'd call that a rather serious purpose. Perhaps this is a problem of language, where the only thing we can conceivably do with a video "game" is to play with it when that is clearly not the case.

http://thesaurus.com/browse/enforce, yes they can have varied meaning and connotations but they can't be THAT dissimilar if they're synonyms. Further, it wasn't just the UN providing the refugees with services. He used connections to force the government to provide basic health care to the refugees; I don't know what more you want than a show of force to consider an action to be enforcing. I get that you were criticizing it on a broader scale, and yes these things are much harder to implement without a decent infrastructure. But the fact remains that China is capable of providing these rights, but remains unwilling to. I am interested in this dichotomy you're talking about, if you'd feel more open you could just pm me. I'd hardly consider this "getting wild" over, everything has just become embroiled since you openly mocked torture victims. And as Dan pointed out, why do you get to dictate what is important and what isn't. And further, why shouldn't we add this to the list of China's atrocities? It's one more claim to lay against them.

This is a curious step in logic: just because these countries (Including our own) do not hold to those conditions, doesn't mean they should be expected or demanded to change. So just because some entity is doing something, something which can usually be seen as obviously morally wrong or at least dubious, that doesn't mean others should expect or demand a change. Just because our country right now continues to be homophobic, racist, sexist, islamaphobic etc. we shouldn't do anything and should just be expected to carry on. Wasn't there that whole Civil Rights Movement that hinged on the idea that people can demand equal treatment from their government and actually make gains in the quality of life? Yeah, the world still sucks, and politics often delays these processes, but to say that we cannot demand change from our society is to give up. Sure go ahead -- make all the demands you want. While you're at it, put a pile of poo in one hand and pile of those demands in another, and guess which one will draw China's attention first. It's not within the U.N.'s mandate to make these changes happen neither is it within its power. That said if you WANT to make change happen in China, find a way to get Facebook and Twitter to have a wider audience therein. If the Arab Spring is any example, and I think it is, these social networks are having more affect making change, than anything the U.N.'s managed to do in the past 70 years. I'm not commenting on the rest of your post because I don't like interfering with posts directed at other too much, but: "Sure go ahead -- make all the demands you want. While you're at it, put a pile of poo in one hand and pile of those demands in another, and guess which one will draw China's attention first. " What the [bleep] is that even supposed to mean? Yes a pile of crap in someone's hand would draw attention faster than demands (assumably written, if they're being held, as demands alone are incorporeal), but that has nothing to do with anything. Are you trying to imply that the demands are worth less than fecal matter? If so your comparison is awkwardly phrased and badly executed. And if not, I repeat: What the [bleep] is it supposed to mean, then? Anyways, if you're saying demands is worthless, then I'd like to ask you what would have happened if you had never applied for a college. I paraphrased and old expression ... [/hide] So what you're basically saying is that it's pointless to acknowledge an atrocity as an atrocity if you as a single person cannot stop it alone? Because the only way to gain support and actually gain the support to end this is through knowledge. Which is spread through stories like the one linked by this article. No. What I am saying is that you can scream all you want about certain "atrocities", but the likelihood that you're going to affect change screaming about them is so close to zero, that it's really not worth the time or effort to get all excited about them. Mainly because, in this case, the act itself isn't all that atrocious, despite the tender mercies of certain individuals herein to claim otherwise. There's a time to pick your battles. There's a time to get morally outraged. This isn't one of them. Torture is torture, yes it may not be as physically extreme as other methods listed earlier but these things can add up (Not to mention, you know, psychological torture can be just as damaging). And yes, I agree we have to be smart about our battles, but more information is never bad and it's not like my empathy is an extremely finite resource. "Oh no, sorry Palestinian living in poverty in Gaza, I was sympathizing with Chinese torture victims today, no sympathy for you. I can pen you in sometime next week." I'd agree if you said that you need to consider where to devote our resources to have the greatest impact, but moral outrage isn't something that has to run out as long as stuff like this can continue to happen.

What about petitioning the government because your local government is corrupt? I didnt know they had state and local governments I thought everything had to go through the central national government in china. Ninja'd

I'd concede this to an extent in that they have little military power to stop offenders (See: Darfur); but saying that they are completely unable to support human rights is hyperbolic (For an example see here.) "Support" and "enforce" are two entirely different things. "Because I could use the intergovernmental clout of the U.N. to win asylum permission, disembarkation permission to get the various ministries concerned to get ships into the port to allow refugees on board to allow them temporary shelter in hospitals and in camps in Singapore." --From my source about a UN official using it's power and connections in order to "enforce" Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of HR. Sorry the words I chose were not completely interchangeable with yours, but they do bear enough resemblance to carry my argument. Now moving on from the Topicality... "There is a difference between having rights and enjoying those rights. In most countries there is still a big gap between human rights in theory and in practice." Source Simply because they are not being practiced doesn't make them go away. I still have a right to privacy, no matter how much the government spies on me. If the idea of rights can disappear when they are violated, then no one but rich old white heterosexual men would ever have any rights, ever. And considering your track record, I doubt that's the kind of world you believe in or want to create. There is a difference between enjoying those rights and/or wanting and needing those rights. In a Western democracy, where we've got food on store shelves, income to provide pretty houses and lots of interesting fashions to cover our backsides, it's very easy to think that our "rights" are "Universal". In a place where one struggles to find food, has little or no shelter, barely enough clothing to stay warm, it is entirely another matter. These people are often more concerned about where their next meal is coming from, or if they will ever have fresh drinking water, than having concerns about their "right to privacy", or any other "right" deemed "universal". These notions of "Universal Human Rights" are merely luxuries, afforded to those who have the free time to employ and otherwise enjoy them. Ask a starving man if he'd rather eat (and do what you tell him) or vote and exercise his Universal Human Right – which do you think he will choose? If you think he will choose the latter, then you're even more out of touch with the greater realities of what goes on this world than I originally suspected. China is many things, but a third world country it is not. And no, I'm not so "out of touch with the greater realities of what goes on this world" to think that lack of food or shelter aren't problems in China. A person you described living in China, however, would be far in the minority, especially in urban areas. So to expect basic human decencies to be upheld in one of the largest economies in the world isn't exactly a stretch. This is a curious step in logic: just because these countries (Including our own) do not hold to those conditions, doesn't mean they should be expected or demanded to change. So just because some entity is doing something, something which can usually be seen as obviously morally wrong or at least dubious, that doesn't mean others should expect or demand a change. Just because our country right now continues to be homophobic, racist, sexist, islamaphobic etc. we shouldn't do anything and should just be expected to carry on. Wasn't there that whole Civil Rights Movement that hinged on the idea that people can demand equal treatment from their government and actually make gains in the quality of life? Yeah, the world still sucks, and politics often delays these processes, but to say that we cannot demand change from our society is to give up. Sure – go ahead -- make all the demands you want. While you're at it, put a pile of poo in one hand and pile of those demands in another, and guess which one will draw China's attention first. It's not within the U.N.'s mandate to make these changes happen – neither is it within its power. That said – if you WANT to make change happen in China, find a way to get Facebook and Twitter to have a wider audience therein. If the Arab Spring is any example, and I think it is, these social networks are having more affect making change, than anything the U.N.'s managed to do in the past 70 years. And what is this article for if not a rallying point to try and change Chinese policies? This was written, posted, and then re-posted here in an effort to make the lives of Chinese citizens better, and since you agree that internet activism can achieve great things why are you so cynical about this whole thing? Like TTanT said above, you're acknowledging that we must band together in new ways through social networks to fight modern tyranny. Except that's exactly what you're interfering with, demeaning, laughing at, and being cynical about.

Hi again, getting back from a regular-ish sleep schedule and a morning class, so...back to business. Starting classy with an ad hominem attack, but fair enough I'll continue finding sources. I'd concede this to an extent in that they have little military power to stop offenders (See: Darfur); but saying that they are completely unable to support human rights is hyperbolic (For an example see here.) "There is a difference between having rights and enjoying those rights. In most countries there is still a big gap between human rights in theory and in practice." Source Simply because they are not being practiced doesn't make them go away. I still have a right to privacy, no matter how much the government spies on me. If the idea of rights can disappear when they are violated, then no one but rich old white heterosexual men would ever have any rights, ever. And considering your track record, I doubt that's the kind of world you believe in or want to create. This is a curious step in logic: just because these countries (Including our own) do not hold to those conditions, doesn't mean they should be expected or demanded to change. So just because some entity is doing something, something which can usually be seen as obviously morally wrong or at least dubious, that doesn't mean others should expect or demand a change. Just because our country right now continues to be homophobic, racist, sexist, islamaphobic etc. we shouldn't do anything and should just be expected to carry on. Wasn't there that whole Civil Rights Movement that hinged on the idea that people can demand equal treatment from their government and actually make gains in the quality of life? Yeah, the world still sucks, and politics often delays these processes, but to say that we cannot demand change from our society is to give up. EDIT: While I'm waiting I'll give a crack at this I'm not sure if you understand how totalitarian governments work but they're not very transparent. Laws are subject to the whims of rulers, can be changed without the willful consent or representation of the governed, and can be bypassed by the government at any moment. There is no logical way for him to necessarily know that this would get him thrown in jail (Though he had to have known there were risks involved, I agree). Stalin kept arrests semi-random to keep the public fearful, paranoid, and untrusting; it would seem China does as well. Ok...then you're clearly a troll. If you didn't care at all you wouldn't post, unless you gained enjoyment from pissing me off; hence a troll. I hear you can get in if you petition.

Because I'm sure they'd love to continue gaming after their experiences in gold farming.

yes they do, they can veto any policy they want. and the USA doesnt follow all regulations, yet gets away with it. Becoming a member of the United Nations is open to all peace loving States which accept the obligations contained within the United Nations Charter. The Second Purpose stated in the United Nation's charter includes: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace. And in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms... And yes, I stated before that China is hardly the only offender, but that doesn't make this passable.

But who are we to assert that our definition of human rights is superior to those exercised within one's own borders? :unsure: The ability to realize that our definition is not necessarily the same as another's definition is the first step in achieving a compromise -- dontcha think? As others have pointed out, China is part of the UN and (Should) accept and abide by the UN's definition of human rights. I'd be the first to point out that not every member, especially not the US, has a great track record with this, but you were also pointed out that China's treatment of their people is ATROCIOUS. If they weren't a part of the UN your argument might be valid, but they decided to be part of a Western-oriented multinational organization so they have to play by those rules. And understanding that opposing views are different is not the same as knowing that they are equally valid and diametrically opposed, inherently. EDIT: I'm still not sure where you stand. You're cynical about our response and laughing at the "bleeding-hearts," I get that. But in the beginning you weren't laughing at our naivety, you were laughing at the tortured. Mock us for being optimistic, fine, but you still haven't answered us as to why you're laughing at the torture victim. ... and I am still laughing at the "tortured" -- because like it or not, they're right where they got because, somewhere, they crossed the line ... ... and in crossing that line, they deserve the punishment they received. Again, like it or not, China has every right to treat it's citizens in the manner that they deem appropriate. ... and the fact that said punishment was, contrarily, being forced to play video games makes it laughable. On the scale of crying out for attention, the source of the story seriously dropped the ball. If he had wanted sympathy from me, he lost any of it the moment he began the whole playing video games was torture portion of it. In the history of all that is inhumane -- of the stories of the Soviet Gulags, the Concentration Camps -- of man's inhumanity to other men, playing video games is ... what? Really? Really! Like I said -- get some perspective here. It's a sad story. A terrible thing. Yes. ... and I can see them making a movie about it now -- Jackie Chan as the man whom, against all odds, gets his Night Elf Mohawk action, wins the girl, kicks all the guard's asses and then escapes the prison in a moment of furious keyboard action, the likes of which one has never seen before on the big screen. All in 3-D!!!! :rolleyes: I think you missed part of my post: CHINA IS PART OF THE UN. Meaning, they DO NOT have the "right" to treat their citizens how they deem appropriate without consequence. And I still think you're missing the point to this: they aren't playing video games as a pastime, video games are being used as a tool for both unfair economic gain and psychological torture. When they are forced to play video games, it seems to me, that you keep conceptualizing it to how we, I assume, have always known them. Anything can be used as a torture device psychologically, but no one has the rights to use them as such. And as Omali pointed out this is a way to be proactive, realizing that the "Chinese sweatshops" we always talked about can be so shameful is another way to deter gold buyers and thus take away the incentives from the prisons/shops.

But who are we to assert that our definition of human rights is superior to those exercised within one's own borders? :unsure: The ability to realize that our definition is not necessarily the same as another's definition is the first step in achieving a compromise -- dontcha think? As others have pointed out, China is part of the UN and (Should) accept and abide by the UN's definition of human rights. I'd be the first to point out that not every member, especially not the US, has a great track record with this, but you were also pointed out that China's treatment of their people is ATROCIOUS. If they weren't a part of the UN your argument might be valid, but they decided to be part of a Western-oriented multinational organization so they have to play by those rules. And understanding that opposing views are different is not the same as knowing that they are equally valid and diametrically opposed, inherently. EDIT: I'm still not sure where you stand. You're cynical about our response and laughing at the "bleeding-hearts," I get that. But in the beginning you weren't laughing at our naivety, you were laughing at the tortured. Mock us for being optimistic, fine, but you still haven't answered us as to why you're laughing at the torture victim.

Playing a video game in itself is not torture, no. Physically at least. In this case the 12 hour shift of gold farming, coupled with the extreme lack of sleep, does count as psychological torture, which yes can be just as damaging as physical torture. And yes there are more newsworthy stories, and no my life won't be directly affected by this. But it won't be directly affected by an earthquake in Japan, or flooding in Pakistan, or a war in Libya either; just because the earth keeps spinning and nature remains indifferent to our mortal suffering that does not make this story unimportant. Perhaps this is the wrong forum, it doesn't directly apply to us here in relation to the runescape community, but that doesn't excuse your dismissal of damaging psychological treatment.

Not all penal systems are the same, and considering that China has about 10x the number of "politically subversive" prisoners that the US has you can't make a direct comparison. And despite that, the number of human's rights violations by the Chinese Penal system is extensive: "The Chinese penal system, which lacks a fair judicial process, employs an extensive network of forced labor camps in order to “reform” criminals through labor. Its purpose, however, is to remove political opposition from society while simultaneously improving the economy. Worse, as an institutional tool for the government to stifle political opposition, the penal system almost inevitably employs the use of both physical and psychiatric torture. In such a penal system, torture is justified as a means to secure confessions and the compliance of political dissidents. In the absence of due process and improper criminal procedures, coupled with the enticement of profit-making, prisoners are susceptible to illegal organ harvesting and trafficking globally." China's human rights record is appalling. APPALLING! The actions they commit against their own people in the name of law and order is absolutely gawd-awful. On the scale of one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the most lenient – "forcing" prisoners to play video games is, roughly, one-million-and-six. On a scale of world-wide issues – ranging from world peace, the Arab Spring, the death of bin Laden, the world economic crisis, flooding, tornadoes, earthquakes, the Sudan, Israel/Arab relations and everything else – not to mention that the rapture is coming on May 21, 2011 October 21, 2011 – a news story that, some FOUR YEARS AGO, the Chinese were "forcing" prisoners to play video games for money, isn't even a distant BLIP on the radar of what is newsworthy or of any concern, at all. Jesus Christ, people, get some PERSPECTIVE already ... The thing is they aren't REPLACING the coal mining with gold farming, the gold farming is IN ADDITION to everything else. So it's more like "Sleep? After an entire day of exhausting physical labor? Lol no, just play video games until you can no longer see straight and then go back to the mines. Sleep is for the dead."

Not all penal systems are the same, and considering that China has about 10x the number of "politically subversive" prisoners that the US has you can't make a direct comparison. And despite that, the number of human's rights violations by the Chinese Penal system is extensive: "The Chinese penal system, which lacks a fair judicial process, employs an extensive network of forced labor camps in order to “reform” criminals through labor. Its purpose, however, is to remove political opposition from society while simultaneously improving the economy. Worse, as an institutional tool for the government to stifle political opposition, the penal system almost inevitably employs the use of both physical and psychiatric torture. In such a penal system, torture is justified as a means to secure confessions and the compliance of political dissidents. In the absence of due process and improper criminal procedures, coupled with the enticement of profit-making, prisoners are susceptible to illegal organ harvesting and trafficking globally." EDIT: Just to reinforce your complete lack of empathy and utter disregard for basic human rights, they aren't just sitting on the couch playing video games. "If I couldn't complete my work quota, they would punish me physically. They would make me stand with my hands raised in the air and after I returned to my dormitory they would beat me with plastic pipes. We kept playing until we could barely see things," said Dali. Mental exhaustion and physical torture are SERIOUS [bleep]ING OFFENSES.

[hide] Did you even read the article? Why yes, as a matter of fact I did -- didn't you? Shall I read it for you? Once upon a time in a land far far away, there was this place where bad people went and they banged rocks, fletched chopsticks, read books and played video games. It was all such hard work. The end. :rolleyes: Satire does not become the situation at all. This is a major problem which the public has had at least an idea of in the past - where people who were either poor or enslaved had to do stuff like this. Truthfully I thought that China had "outlawed" the sale of virtual gold. If prisons are doing this, then it's a pandemic that can't be stopped by simply going to the Chinese government [again] and asking nicely. On the contrary, it's a hilarious situation. You've got murderers, rapists and goodness-knows what other types of known criminals who, instead of being punished through hard-labour, are now all huddled in front of computer screens playing video games -- and complaining about it ... :rolleyes: [/hide]Further proof that you did not read the article. Not all of these people are the low point of society, "Liu Dali was imprisoned by the Chinese government in 2004 for 'illegally petitioning' it to end the rampant corruption in his hometown. He was sentenced to 3 years at the Jixi labor camp."