First American Internet Addiction Treatment Center 278
Posted
by
timothy
from the cure-for-what-doesn't-quite-ail-ye dept.
from the cure-for-what-doesn't-quite-ail-ye dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Taking their lead from China, two Americans have opened the first US-based Internet Addiction treatment center in Fall City, Wash. — ironically close to Redmond (Microsoft's hometown). The center, called reStart: Internet Addiction Recovery Program, is a 45-day treatment center where, for a steep set of fees, people can be cured of their addiction to the Web. After paying the $200 application fee, addicts are charged $14,500 for the 45 days, an additional $800 for a screening, and more for extra services, like kayaking ($1,575)."
What a rip off... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:money (Score:3, Interesting)
Concerned Parents would be the target market here, I'm guessing.
And why are they Concerned? Because they read all the marketing literature about the horrible fate awaiting their precious little snowflakes if they spend too much time on WoW.
Re:Internet Addition = Pornography Addition (Score:3, Interesting)
They should have a service like this for religious people. Religious nutcase addicts are far more dangerous than some dude that plays warcraft all day or something.
Re:Internet Addition = Pornography Addition (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't mind religious people. I know a few people who are devout Christians. I also know a few people who're really into Islam. The funny thing is that they get along pretty well. And why not? I mean, both believe in one god with probably slightly different hairdo (we'll never know, after all neither may draw pictures of him) and they call him by different names.
They're no problem. Enjoy and live and do whatever your favorite pastime may be. Mine is hacking virtual beings, yours is worshipping one, no harm in either. I also don't mind if you run around telling everyone how cool your imaginary friend is.
It stops being cool when people go around beating up people or worse in the name of their imaginary friend, because they claim he doesn't like what they're doing. It's kinda odd to see laws being passed based on the ideas of your imaginary friend. I mean, just because Harvey here thinks it's cool to force everyone to eat carrots on Sundays, I can't go around cramming orange vegetables down everyone's throat and, when (rightfully) arrested, claim it was Harvey's idea and thus should be law.
Freedom of speech, fine. Freedom to force your views onto me to limit mine, not fine.
He didn't talk about religious people. They're ok. If that's what you need to enjoy your life, more power to you. Enjoy it. He was talking about religious nutjobs. Which is, at least by my standards, anyone who deems it right to force the behaviour which is "right" according to his religion on other who couldn't care less what some God or Goddess or Spirit or whatever wants.
Re:money (Score:3, Interesting)
It will be worse than that. We will soon spend a lot of our time "connected" in some way. We already reached the point where we are always, everywhere readily reachable, something that was anything but normal a little over a decade ago. Today you're seen as some sort of weirdo if you don't have a cell and thus can't be reached everywhere, including tub and can.
When I look at some of the kids I'm working with, I see a trend towards an urge to be "omnipresent", at least virtually. They want to be in touch with everyone they know, they expect their friends to be reachable rather than being called back, likewise, they feel disconnected if they cannot be reached instantly. I rather see a trend towards more mobile connectivity rather than being more "static" connected. They don't just want to be able to reach others, it's important for them to be reachable.