Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Population Bust

foreignaffairs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 182 posts

Re: The Population Bust

#161

Post by sdenton4 »

Robotbeat wrote: post #84
Aperocky wrote: post #3

Soon it won't matter what the population is, automation will sweep through all industries, what you see today in automation is what people 30 years ago see in computers - slow, cumbersome, expensive. That's going to change.

It's only worth automating something if there's enough demand to justify the investment in the automation process. If population declines, we may actually see less automation for some things... ...and therefore cost increases.

OTOH, automation enables things that fundamentally aren't possible with any number of humans, due to economics. If we find ways to lower the cost of automation itself, lovely things can happen.

Re: The Population Bust

#162

Post by Noumenon72 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #68
ttugrq wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an American and I want there to be enough nurses and orderlies in American nursing homes when the time comes that I need them.

I’d rather go quietly into the night when the time comes that I’m not self sufficient (via assisted suicide). Perhaps that’s wishful thinking, and I won’t have the mental fortitude at that time.

Also likely, "culture of life" virtue signallers will prevent you from doing what's right for you by nudges that make suicide difficult, painful, and illegal. Part of your plan should be to support assisted suicide politically. For example, Neil Gorsuch wrote a book advocating against euthanasia, making him one of the worst Supreme Court picks I can imagine. https://press.princeton.edu/titles/8317.html

Re: The Population Bust

#163

Post by drivebycomment »

_0ffh wrote: post #156
drivebycomment wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not all parts of the world have yet had that kind of progress, and are still happily multiplying in an unsustainable way. Unless we manage to export this kind of progress, I fear we will not be able to avoid all overpopulation issues. This is simply not true. Not even close. I recommend watching: https://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-l... or, if you can spend more time, https://www.gapminder.or…

I've watched Rosling stuff before. What part of the linked videos do you think are evidence against? I maintain there are a number of countries that still have unsustainable population growth. I wouldn't want to pick any one out. But be my guest and have a look-see at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_natural_i...

The population growth is basically a transitional state between high infant mortality / high birthrate to low infant mortality / low birthrate. There's no society in existence that had sustained "high birthrate / low infant mortality".

Play the following graph from 1800 to today:

https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$state$marker$axis_x$which=...

It's very clear where we're headed and we're actually closer to the stable point, given China and India are already near the birthrate of 2.

> ... are still happily multiplying in an unsustainable way.

See the graph above. This is already not true.

> Unless we manage to export this kind of progress

This has already happened mostly. Africa is the laggard currently but is already rapidly catching up, and it's crystal clear that we'll get there.

I recommend taking the gapminder.org test. I think you'll be surprised how wrong you are.

Re: The Population Bust

#164

Post by guerrilla »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #111
guerrilla wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could surely kill humanity but we cannot possibly eliminate complex life from Earth. Why do you think nuclear war can't do that?

The Chicxulub impactor (an asteroid that killed the dinosaurs), had impact energy roughly equivalent to 100 million TSAR Bombas (50MT nuke) and the largest nuclear weapon ever denotated. The currently nuclear stockpile is about 1000x short, with some very friendly assumptions about our capabilities. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater

Nuclear bombs aren't simply bombs releasing their energy, they would also fill the atmosphere with radioactive material. It would contaminate the entire planet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout

Re: The Population Bust

#165

Post by AnthonyMouse »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #139
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Productivity increases due to automation go to the owners of capital. That is only true if there is a monopoly on automation, which there generally isn't. In which case the productivity increases go into lower prices, which result in greater demand for whatever is still scarce. That can be capital owners (e.g. land), but it can also be skilled labor or literally anything else which is in demand and people choose to…

Whatever the reasoning, data shows wealth and income gaps increasing, and the ones with capital are the on the winning side.

That has nothing to do with automation and everything to do with low interest rates. When interest rates are low, people borrow more money and bid up the prices of capital assets.

Re: The Population Bust

#166

Post by dumbfoundded »

guerrilla wrote: post #164
dumbfoundded wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chicxulub impactor (an asteroid that killed the dinosaurs), had impact energy roughly equivalent to 100 million TSAR Bombas (50MT nuke) and the largest nuclear weapon ever denotated. The currently nuclear stockpile is about 1000x short, with some very friendly assumptions about our capabilities. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater

Nuclear bombs aren't simply bombs releasing their energy, they would also fill the atmosphere with radioactive material. It would contaminate the entire planet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout

The radioactivity still wouldn't kill all multicellular life (or even complex life). Some predict that an all-out nuclear war wouldn't even make humans go extinct.

A few sources:

- https://www.msn.com/en-in/health/medical/20-life-forms-that-...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_holocaust

- https://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p912.htm

Re: The Population Bust

#167

Post by dumbfoundded »

sgt101 wrote: post #141
dumbfoundded wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that humanity is basically a pyramid scheme. It takes more and more people to cover the debts and improve the world they received from the previous generations. I don't particularly agree with this viewpoint.

Who's debts are the world's population covering? Are we in hoc to Mars?!

Here are a few debts we have:

- Governmental fiscal debt

- Global climate change

- Societal debt. By this I mean, the previous generation left an unstable society at risk of collapse for the next generation. I would imagine a person born in 1920 would feel this way. As a programmer, I would frame this as "tech" debt for our social institutions.

Re: The Population Bust

#168

Post by swagasaurus-rex »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #91
paulsutter wrote: post #87

This isn’t a problem, it’s just preparation for the next stage of evolution (AGI). Our task is nearly complete.

I often wonder what post AGI society will look like: - Will we become pets? - Will we become extinct? - Will we absorb into the AGI? Maybe the AGI will just disappear and leave human affairs to humans and with some residual presence to ensure we never create a second. I think much more likely than real AGI, we create an "intelligent" computer virus that locks up all networked computing power.

Perhaps humans, with the aid of super powerful computers, can unlock our genome and in turn make us more competitive.

There will be some left behind, but humanity will continue on as an partially artificial GMO much like our own creations

Re: The Population Bust

#169

Post by tapland »

yters wrote: post #117
Aperocky wrote: post #3

Soon it won't matter what the population is, automation will sweep through all industries, what you see today in automation is what people 30 years ago see in computers - slow, cumbersome, expensive. That's going to change.

What's the point of automating everything if there are no more people? I think ultimately people are the source of happiness for people. Material things are just an intermediary in the happiness exchange. So, if we get rid of people to replace them with material things we will become less happy. Plus, it isn't obvious that all the important stuff can be automated.

> So, if we get rid of people to replace them with material things we will become less happy.

No. People who don't exist don't experience anything.

And there are plenty of people who are born and who as adults wish they had never been, and a lot of us who are still ok with it but not very excited are still biased since we do exist. This is not a problem for those who are never born. They don't become people who can feel pain and suffering.

There are plenty of people. I really doubt that an increase in people is in itself a reason for increased happiness. Noone is arguing for exterminating parts of the not needed population because of automation.

Re: The Population Bust

#170

Post by ryacko »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #95
ryacko wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it unlikely that piracy and government navies imposing tolls on shipping lanes will return without a US Navy. The Petrodollar is dependent on the US Navy, but that is it. Very few militaries have modernized, until recently, if the Falklands War occurred again, the British and the Argentines would be largely using the same weapons and equipment (partly from deliveries of the F-35), the greatest pressure on tyra…

I think piracy is highly likely without a strong unified (not necessarily American) naval presence. It wouldn't be Somalian pirates. I'd guess it'd look more like the piracy of the 17th and 18th century where state-sponsored individuals create profit and havoc from interference with competing countries. Shipping fragmentation also seems likely without a strong global navy. As you mention, the Petrodollar is dependent…

It requires very little equipment to fight a future war against pirates? Or even disorganized militia groups acting as pirates?

The US did more to hamper oil prices by invading Iraq than anything else.

Post reply on HN