New CBB

Yes, people die in cars. People also die in their own houses. You can take your logic and declare anything a dangerous death machine.

Cars have had nearly 100 years to perfect themselves. We have everything from seatbelts to shift locks to airbags to lessen injury in accidents. Even the very suspension of most production automobiles are designed to understeer, preventing dangerous oversteer that could cause an accident. The very bodies themselves are designed to crumple as much as possible so energy in a crash goes into the body panelling and not the people inside. You should see the accidents pro racers get into--and how they rarely sustain injuries.

Sorry for sounding like you kicked my dog, but I'm having a bad day and I don't like critisism of cars that much. They're not as terrible as people make them out to be.

_________________
Banami bhjaddhos rafi mau cy vyaja cecerror.
Fools do not see the sun nor sail the seas
-Azenti Proverb

Depends on whether the rapist slips it to the victim without the victim's knowledge and/or consent, or whether the affected person takes it themselves on purpose to make an act they intend to do more fun. In other words, Rohypnol or GHB (as usually used) is rape, Viagra or Cialis (as usually used) is not.

---

As for the question in the thread title, viz. "Which do you prefer for your world: low tech or higher tech?":

I kind of like several different tech-levels.

My main conworld/conculture starts with the arrival of humans and goes on 'til their development of interstellar travel and trade/diplomacy.

That gives me scope for pretty much anything.

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

Ahh, love this old fallacy. "Anything with a social cost higher than zero should be banned and gotten rid of, no matter how much of a benefit it provides. Therefore, this thing X I like must be proven to have zero cost or downsides in order to justify keeping it around!"

Protip: The benefits cars provide far, far outweigh their costs, but this does not mean the costs don't exist. You're barking up the wrong tree here.

_________________
♀♥Ø

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

Here is a thing for everyone that complains about anything that is dangerous.

Guys, take a guess what the most dangerous thing you do every day? Living.

By living you are everyday exposing yourself to the threat of death.

So clearly the logical thing to do to ensure people won't have that threat to them is to kill everyone.


Of course this is all highly fallacious and only intended as humour, but it's to illustrate that things are dangerous, get over it.

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

Or, you know, find equally effective but less-dangerous alternatives. There's always that.

_________________
任何事物的发展都是物极必反，否极泰来。

that is a good idea, but life is still dangerous so get over it :P

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

You're still being highly fallacious for the purpose of humor, right? Not as an actual point?

_________________
任何事物的发展都是物极必反，否极泰来。

I am being fallacious for humour effect which I use in turn to get to a point.

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

An interesting rhetorical strategy, but if you start with a fallacy, your point is unsound, humorous or otherwise.


Anyway.

I don't really have a preference; there are just as many possibilities for high-tech or low-tech conworlds, and I especially have fun with worlds that have a mix. Domhantir is actually pretty high-tech given the capabilities of various magic arts, but a lot of the places where I do most of my development (like Feayra) are very low tech.

_________________
任何事物的发展都是物极必反，否极泰来。

If I start with a falalcy it is fallacious only within that context.

I agree though, I enjoy steampunk for example :3 great mix of laods

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

But any conclusion that then follows from it is unsound. Come on, you were just talking about logical validity over on the zeeb


I can't work this out from context...is it a typo, or term I'm not familiar with...?

_________________
任何事物的发展都是物极必反，否极泰来。

*loads (of things) would be my guess

_________________
КЕРВЕНСКИЙ

Correct =)


Only if there is a connection thats intended :P

If I use a fallacy to make a joke it is meant as a laugh because of its absurdity which I then use to make a point then the point isn't depended on the fallacy and if its not depended it is not unsound because if Iremove the fallacy it remains still valid :P Though the fallacy makes it more fun.

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

In English, we just call that Sarcasm.

_________________
♀♥Ø

I'm a sarcasm-utilizing cynic. (yeah, that was random, but you said sarcasm, so...)
I'm also a überdragon trapped in a human body, but don't tell anyone.

_________________
___________________ I am the Great Rabbit. Fear me, O Crabs!

_________________
"Wait for the starvation of glaciers, chicken hamburger Noel Weber Arthur."

= | = | =

You never know.

(Or would saying that be heresy?)

_________________
___________________ I am the Great Rabbit. Fear me, O Crabs!