Tech News Today 272: My Possessed Hand Did It

Supreme Court strikes down anti-game law, e-readers leaving tablets in the dust, AntiSec in a post-LulzSec era, and more.

Download or subscribe to this show at

Submit and vote on story coverage at

We invite you to read, add to, and amend our show notes at

Thanks to Cachefly for the bandwidth for this show.

Video URL:

Video URL (low quality):

Running time: 


18 Responses to “Tech News Today 272: My Possessed Hand Did It”

  1. Your story about the Supreme Court… it’s sad to say but the case was poorly fought.

    There is tonnes of evidence

    But until all media is challenged at the same time – so that rules for books are the same as rules for games, etc. The Justices can’t favour one media over another. (Yet.)

    But as you know, the Supreme Court and America’s efforts to create reasonable regulation falls down because everyone is hell bent on preserving the right to free speech. As Goldbloom says in Jurassic Park: you are so bent trying to see if something was possible, you don’t stop to see if it is something that should…

    To think there was so much outrage about consenting adults of the same sex marrying one another out of concern for society. But somehow violent games can be sold to minors? I don’t get it…

    (I just wanted to share that the APA has quite a lot of info on the behavioural effects of the games.) stay well!

  2. Duwayne A. Wright

    Tom, love the work. Lose the bread. It’s not working. I never comment on anything. And I had to reach out to say something as I watch Tom’s Top Five for the first time.

  3. I assume he means beard, not bread. I don’t think losing food is ever a good thing.

    But yeah, I kind of agree with Duwayne, but really only because the last time I followed you regularly before like a month ago was back when you were on BOL and didn’t have the beard yet. It’s taking me a bit of time to get used to how the tech news coverage sphere has changed since then.

    Keep up the good work, mate, TnT is an ingrained part of my daily rituals now.

  4. Personally Tom, I would lose the bread machine. That way you’ll make it a gradual transition to “no bread”. Ease into it. You don’t want to wake up with no bread after having bread the night before. That would be horrible.
    Love the work!

  5. Correlation does not imply causation. Your “tonnes of evidence” is one 8 year old meta-analysis of research that finds only causation. There is more recent 2010 meta-analysis by Dr. Anderson which finds largely a similar correlation but still not causation.

    Referring to Anderson’s analysis, British psychologist Guy Cumberbatch, noted, “[F]inding that people who enjoy violent media may also be aggressive is tantamount to observing that those who play football also enjoy watching it on television. ‘The correlational nature of [this] study means that causal statements are risky at best,’ the authors admit. …All in all, Anderson and Dill’s new evidence is exceptionally weak, and in its one-sided approach it has a depressingly familiar ring to it. …[S]tudies to date have been notably biased towards seeking evidence of harm. This ‘blame game’ may be fun for some researchers to play, and knee-jerk reactions such as the APA’s press release may be media-friendly. But we deserve better.”

    There is also no real-world evidence of an effect from violent video games. Examples like Columbine might be proffered. While tragic, they are far from indications of a widespread effect, but rather so small in frequency that they are barely even statistical anomalies and could be caused by any number of factors.

    What the Supreme Court very largely found, was that there was no scientific evidence that violent video games *cause* violence. In the absence of that evidence there is no reason to restrict video games preferentially over other forms of media. If a minor can buy “Lord of the Flies” they should be allowed “Call of Duty”. Additionally they found the definition of violence too vague. If the California law had defined exceptional violence in a narrow way, the court indicated they might have ruled differently.

  6. The beard is working, keep it.

    Beards are cool. Besides, who really wants to take sharp steel to their throat first thing every morning?

    P.S: Bread is cool too. 😉

  7. I have at various times had a beard and not had a beard. My recommendation to you, Tom, is to keep it if:
    • You feel it is comfortable.
    • Your wife likes it.
    • You like having those five minutes a day to do something else besides shaving.
    Don’t worry about what we all say. Though as a sometime-beard-wearer, I do say that your beard is a fine one.

  8. I love Bread! Wish I could give it up.
    But as for the beard, I listen to the audio so I don’t even know what it looks like.
    You don’t sound any different.