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

World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

worldometers.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 191 posts

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#91

Post by FooHentai »

jimbob45 wrote: post #15
nivenkos wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you live in the wealthiest country in the world (over 100 continuous years of highest GDP) with high salaries and lots of habitable space (from exterminating the native populace). But that's not sustainable - the US has the highest CO2 emissions per capita when you factor in imports, etc. nevermind other environmental damage. And is also dependent on terrible conditions in Asia, etc. to produce all the cheap…

We’re on track for electric cars to overtake gas cars in twenty years. Nuclear power is making a comeback. Even electric planes are in the wings. Best of all, lab-grown meat is here now and we’re just waiting for the price to come down. It seems as though we’ll have solved our emissions issues by the next generation. Would you still argue against a higher population once we largely solve the emissions issues? Or is t…

If you take a 'planetary boundaries' view [1] we're outside of the safe operating limits for several factors: Extinctions, land system change, novel entities, biogeochemical flows, and climate change. 'Solving' emissions would only really address one of those (climate change).

Take a theoretical world where population was drastically lower (or individual consumption is hugely slashed amongst the top consumers): We would drop within the safe boundary for all limits simultaneously, because the underlying multipliers for all of them are number of people and individual consumption.

[1]https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2...

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#92

Post by hilbert42 »

These stats are frightening. In the past I recall seeing several different sets of figures for the amount of food the average human consumes in a lifetime. One estimate was about 70 tons and the other was 100 tons. (If anyone has better or more definite figures then let's hear about them.)

Now, if we consider the other resources every new human will also consume during his or her lifetime - houses, vehicles, white goods, electronic tech etc., etc. - then that extra demand on the planet's resources will be enormous.

What's worried me for a long time - ever since I read Anne and Paul Ehrlich's 1968 book The Population Bomb is that the population will outstrip our ability to find extra resources to support this population growth. Whilst the Ehrlichs overestimated the exponential growth rate I evertheless reckon the evidence supports the fact that they'd gotten the growth trend correct.

It seems to me that unless we quickly take drastic action to either limit population growth or vastly increase food resources or both - not to mention simultaneously keeping environment in a state of sustainability (climate change, etc.) - then the future is likely to be very rocky.

Yes, it's a pessimistic outlook but it looks as if the stats are pretty much against us unless there's a collective realization that something must be done urgently.

I can only hope I'm wrong.

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#93

Post by siva7 »

hilbert42 wrote: post #92

These stats are frightening. In the past I recall seeing several different sets of figures for the amount of food the average human consumes in a lifetime. One estimate was about 70 tons and the other was 100 tons. (If anyone has better or more definite figures then let's hear about them.) Now, if we consider the other resources every new human will also consume during his or her lifetime - houses, vehicles, white go…

Who says that everyone has to eat meat? And who are you to command that millions or billions of people shouldn’t be born in the future?

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#94

Post by usrn »

V__ wrote: post #52
usrn wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter when Africa is exploding. All the low birthrate in the West does is weaken the countries trying to protect the environment. As this continues corporations will bring in the people from these undeveloped countries who will bring their unsustainable cultures with them. This whole "stop having children to save the environment" bullshit is dumber than the anti-nuclear crap and even more obviously wrong.

Yeah, all these African people with their checks notes unsustainable lifestyle of nearly no co2 emissions compared to the rest of the world.

Heh. When the complaint is that the high birthrates of the world are unsustainable, it's the people with the high birthrates that are doing that. Also keep in mind that Africa relies heavily on aid from these countries with the high CO2 emissions. Cutting CO2 really means starving them.

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#95

Post by Jensson »

erklik wrote: post #87
jl6 wrote: post #76

Might as well say it: 8 billion is too many, and it’s a good thing that population growth is levelling off. A decline down to ~1 billion would be fine. If we have to change retirement planning, so be it. No other species can grow its population exponentially indefinitely. Population growth in every other species is kept in check by conflict and starvation. We have an opportunity to voluntarily limit our footprint to…

Why? I don't genuinely understand this pessimism. More people means more brains, more intelligence, more energy to achieve things. More people means more Einstiens, Newtons, Da Vincis etc. I do think our systems need changing. Our society currently incentivizes the smart people into something that's not entirely productive but wishing for less people, hmm, I don't know. I feel like this is the start of history, not t…

> More people means more brains, more intelligence, more energy to achieve things.

More people means less energy and resources per person though, and people with little resources wont be using their brains to solve problems. Likely more people would have the opportunity to become Einstein's or similar if the population stayed at 1 billion than at 10 billion simply because we would have so much more raw resources to invest in every person and their ideas. I don't see the benefit of adding another billion people who have to live a life in poverty. If we could give them a good life, sure add more people, but we can't even give the population of earth a good life today so why add more?

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#96

Post by usrn »

isoprophlex wrote: post #55
usrn wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter when Africa is exploding. All the low birthrate in the West does is weaken the countries trying to protect the environment. As this continues corporations will bring in the people from these undeveloped countries who will bring their unsustainable cultures with them. This whole "stop having children to save the environment" bullshit is dumber than the anti-nuclear crap and even more obviously wrong.

> ... undeveloped countries who will bring their unsustainable cultures with them. I hope you are aware of the carbon footprint of an american versus someone from, say, ethiopia?!

Once they move to the US they have a high carbon footprint like anyone else there. Their culture won't change though, that takes many generations and a relatively homogeneous culture to assimilate into which is going away (largely due to attitudes like this.)

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#97

Post by j245 »

grapeskin wrote: post #84
j245 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet here we are.. having a discussion about whether too many humans are surviving for too long.

And yet here the Aztec aren’t. Living today doesn’t guarantee living tomorrow.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that specific groups will survive no matter what.

The discussion is around whether the human race will survive and continue to grow.

As you may have noticed, population numbers have increased since the days of the Aztecs.

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#98

Post by aleksklarksr »

neals wrote: post #56

When 8B?

We will never know, this site is just a fake js counter, actual population data is very much hidden and obscured by statistics. For example, Russia claim they have 144 millions but in fact according to all data it is close to 120 millions. Same for china, where villages increase their reported population just to get subsidized. Africa? Middle east? Help me god India? Are you sure anyone know how many people died from hunger and anticovid measures recently? It must be a 100 millions deaths at least last two years due to shut down of medicine around the world.

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#99

Post by neals »

aleksklarksr wrote: post #98
neals wrote: post #56

When 8B?

We will never know, this site is just a fake js counter, actual population data is very much hidden and obscured by statistics. For example, Russia claim they have 144 millions but in fact according to all data it is close to 120 millions. Same for china, where villages increase their reported population just to get subsidized. Africa? Middle east? Help me god India? Are you sure anyone know how many people died from…

Interesting take, I believe you. What is your background on this?

Re: World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022)

#100

Post by jotm »

infofarmer wrote: post #69
nivenkos wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My grandad was born in 1925 - he remembers them installing the electric streetlights in Birmingham. The main difference seemed to be car traffic and tourism. It's just unrecognisable nowadays (and even from the 1980s tbh). Such a revolutionary time though - to go from biplanes to jet aircraft, radar, computers, mobile phones, etc. - I can't imagine we'll see a similar rate of change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-of-history_illusion There's an even better cognitive bias than this describing your «optimism» about the future, but I fail to find its name.

I guess you're right. In 1700, I don't think instant worldwide communication was in anyone's wildest predictions of the future. Or even weapons capable of leveling a city in seconds.

I'll be happy if I get to see a scramble for the solar system thanks to some sort of anti-gravitational device or full dive VR tech (or isekai-as-a-service by Mitsubishi).

Post reply on HN