T. Sar

@David We're not quite sure how much people saw religion back then as what we understand as religion now. It could be they were way less fanatical than we are, comparativley.

Discussion on question by TheWookieeB…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Apr 10, 2024 17:59

A "nanobot" is a robot in the scale of nanometers. If your robot is significantly larger than that scale, it is no longer a "nanobot". Referring to larger robots as "nanobots" is a mistake, as much as it is trying to transfer information using quantum entanglement or trying to do "subdimensional proton folding" to create supercomputers. It doesn't meant it can't be entertaining, but it can't be called "hard sci-fi" at that point.

T. Sar

Apr 10, 2024 17:59

@Nosajimiki Nanorobotics vs Microrobotics - or, more specifically, the xenorobotics subfield of microrobotics.

T. Sar

Apr 10, 2024 17:59

@Nosajimiki There is a difference between bioengineered organisms and nanomachines. I agree with you that helpful microorganisms are quite possible, but that's not a nanomachine. What you describe is part of a field called microbotics, and works on a scale far greater than nanomachines. Nanomachines are nanoscopic - so small that several of them exist naturally inside cells.

T. Sar

Apr 10, 2024 17:59

@Nosajimiki The nanomachines you describe would fall into hard-science science territory easily, no questions about that. But those aren't the type of nanomachines OP is asking about - his nanomachines are more akin the "micro intelligent robot that does work forever inside a body" type of nanomachine, and those fall into psuedo-magic territory.

T. Sar

Apr 10, 2024 17:59

@Nosajimiki the nanomachines we refer are those of the sort OP wants to use. Those certainly aren't hard science.

T. Sar

Apr 10, 2024 17:59

@jdunlop Great minds think alike. Nanomachines and hard-science are a no-go combo.

Discussion on answer by ac15: Is God’…

Imported from a comment discussion on philosophy.stackexchange...

T. Sar

Mar 28, 2024 07:27

@stackoverblown We atheists have been saying this for ages!

Discussion between Gray Sheep and Esc…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 13:43

@GraySheep I do not want to engage this dicussion any further.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 13:30

I'm disengaging with this conversation. It went far beyond what is reasonable to discuss already.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 13:30

@AlexP I'm sorry, what? How can you say the church had "no choice"? Of course they had choice - you can just ignore the guy, if you want. Nobody forced the church at the time to murder one person because he belived and preached something different than what was mainstream at the time.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:57

I for example think that the original wording should be preserved, and that an answer for this question then could address the misconception, if there is any.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:56

With all of that said, while I can understand the argument that the OP could be wrong with their original text in the question, I'm not sure if that qualifies as hate speech or even a reason to remove the text from the question. We allow "wrong premises" on questions all the time, and those wrong premises are good material for frame challenges in answers.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:54

@GraySheep intelectual and social decline, to be more specific.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:53

@GraySheep When people talk about "dark ages", they mostly are referring to the abuse the times had over peasants, the corrupt nobility, an the difficulty of the society in progressing sciences as a whole. It was a time of decline, even if great feats got done.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:51

@GraySheep Don't confuse the views of the religion of the time with other developments of the era. Those times had some quite strict religious views, and those often came to the detriment of the population, despite great some great feats of architecture.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:45

@GraySheep Worth to note that the endeavors of some monks didn't speak for the church as a whole during the whole period. The church during what we call medieval times had a bunch of ups and downs, with some periods being way darker than others, with religious figures having wildly differing ideas from one another.

T. Sar

Mar 21, 2024 11:40

@GraySheep The issue you point out as false/hate speech is the idea that the church hated things like individual thought and science?

Discussion on question by Pamela Gall…

Imported from a comment discussion on law.stackexchange.com/qu...

T. Sar

Mar 14, 2024 20:08

You won't be getting any money. You'll turn over the emails, the client will "verify how much they have to pay you", vanish with your data and quite possibly steal some valuable accounts like Steam or Amazon (that you can recover with old receipts).

Discussion on question by Stephen: In…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Feb 24, 2024 15:29

There are other issues with Mission of Gravity, but don't get me wrong - it is a fascinating read for sure.

T. Sar

Feb 24, 2024 15:29

Also, that novel opens up an incredible discussion about what even is hard sci-fi - is it a form of making fiction, or is it scientifical correctness?

T. Sar

Feb 24, 2024 15:29

Hisses at Mission of Gravity being called Hard Sci-fi - more seriously, tho - You might want to check some of the discussion around that novel. It is fascinating.

Discussion on question by alkahest: H…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Feb 23, 2024 02:16

I gave my 2¢ on the topic, too. Hopefully useful!

T. Sar

Feb 23, 2024 02:16

Ahw, you accepted it so quick!

Discussion on answer by Mermaker: If …

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Nov 3, 2023 04:00

@Rick I'm familiar with open channel flows. That said, I'm not sure people are getting from my answer the idea I wanted to pass. It's not that I don't believe them, it's more like I couldn't explain myself properly. I'll do a rewrite on this answer when I have more time.

T. Sar

Nov 3, 2023 04:00

@PipperChip Pound locks, too. Very ancient tech!

T. Sar

Nov 3, 2023 04:00

@ErikHall but canal lasts way longer. It needs maintenance, but even if fully eroded, it will still be there several hundred years later (quite possibly looking like a regular river, but still there)

T. Sar

Nov 3, 2023 04:00

You don't build uphill. Those channels are straight. The fast flowing water comes from a big dam or something similar to keep the river flowing. If you have one of the sides constantly inputting water, water will flow even on a relatively straight line.

T. Sar

Nov 3, 2023 04:00

@AlexP I explicitly said that it wouldn't run as fast as a railway. And, about going both ways - you can always build two canals. We have infinite money, afterall!

Discussion on question by Qwokker: Wh…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Oct 17, 2023 13:19

Is your story going to be about humans? If you're not locked to human-like beings, I might have an idea.

Discussion on question by Monty Wild:…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Sep 22, 2023 15:29

@KarlKnechtel qAnon is a thing.

T. Sar

Sep 22, 2023 15:28

Those characters are banned in most circles, mine included.

T. Sar

Sep 22, 2023 15:27

@MontyWild some folks wanted to play as or have partners that are we colloquially call a "300 year loli" - a child character that, by merits of some reason - race, magic, surgical intervention - is "old" enough to not be a minor, while still having the body and mind of a child.

T. Sar

Sep 21, 2023 20:49

And one more goes with the ban hammer.
4 people ousted themselves so far as creeps thanks to this question. This is honestly quite something!

T. Sar

Sep 21, 2023 18:14

Make it three bans.

T. Sar

Sep 21, 2023 17:20

This question lead to two bans on my RPG discord server. Some folks were trying to use this.... concept to try to create their very own "300 year old lolis" as wives. I understand that this is by no means the intention of the OP, but geez - what a hard concept to deal with!

The Factory Floor

Main chat room for worldbuilding.stackexchange.com

T. Sar

Sep 21, 2023 18:39

I wonder what type of marvel we can find here. So many ideas!

T. Sar

Sep 21, 2023 18:39

At least, not in recent times.

T. Sar

Sep 21, 2023 18:39

It never occured to me that this stack had a chat room.

Discussion on question by Blue Skin a…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

T. Sar

Mar 22, 2023 08:10

You can use haloween turnips for a similar, albeit creepier, result.

Discussion on question by T. Sar: Wha…

Imported from a comment discussion on rpg.stackexchange.com/qu...

T. Sar

Jan 17, 2023 11:57

I offer you this perspective: If I had a question like this when I was gearing up to write my stuff back then, I would have stopped and researched and reconsidered with different eyes if Wizards' was a good bet or not. Documenting this is important.

T. Sar

Jan 17, 2023 11:56

@Dave then we will have to disagree. This site exists to serve RPG players, and as such questions should be judged on their value for the hobby. And, as of now, there isn't anything more impactful for the hobby than the OGL issues. It isn't just about the terms - it is about documenting wizards' behavior, it's about getting peopple to understand what OGL is and why it is important, why everyone is making a fuss on it.

T. Sar

Jan 15, 2023 04:46

I don't understand why you seen to want closure of this situation with such intensity.

T. Sar

Jan 15, 2023 04:45

@Dave I think this situation is extremely exceptional, and kinda transcends regular guidelines.

Discussion on answer by KRyan: What's…

Imported from a comment discussion on rpg.stackexchange.com/qu...

T. Sar

Jan 13, 2023 22:43

"Most firms publishing under the OGL have stated they would sooner go out of business" - I fully agree with that sentiment. WotC's stance is becoming incredibly scary.

T. Sar

Jan 13, 2023 22:43

Thank you for your input. This does look incredibly dire... If 1.1 comes to pass, We'll have no choice but to rewrite everything using an in-house system. My goodness, this feels terrible...

Discussion between NautArch and T. Sar

Imported from a comment discussion on rpg.stackexchange.com/qu...

T. Sar

Jan 12, 2023 20:31

Great.