World Population Clock: 7.96B People (2022) • Hacker News Board

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

#161

Post by lotsofpulp » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 12:52 PM UTC

erklik wrote: post #153

luke2m wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>More resources are used. Yes. However, thinking of it on a universal scale, even resources are "infinite". That's what people thought about oil, trees, etc. before.

and they were right? Resources are practically infinite on a universal scale. We just keep progressing and we will get there. Trees are literally infinite. Just plant enough of them while you cut them down. Oil is not, but oil is energy, and energy is also practically infinite as long as we do it cleanly, and we have the capability to do so that today.

Quality vs quantity.

Quality trees are nowhere near infinite.

Quality energy (stored in a lower state of entropy, conveniently accessible and usable when and where we need it) is not infinite. This one is obviously not true today. If it were, people would not be complaining about increasing fossil fuel prices, since they would be happy using the cheap (due to infinite supply) “clean” energy.

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

#162

Post by doggwalker » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 1:26 PM UTC

orangepurple wrote: post #23

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…

Americans are saints when it comes to environmental destruction. Many African countries have very high birth rates and they do whatever it takes to survive, environment be damned, such as pouring used motor oil on the ground without batting and eye or thinking twice about the effects to their own health. Don't even get me started about the mining and deforestation.

770 million Africans don't even have access to electricity.

Telling Africans they need to stay poor and stop having children is a pretty standard Western stuff.

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

#163

Post by smallerfish » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 1:27 PM UTC

pclmulqdq wrote: post #155

smallerfish wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We _can_, but will we? We're not fated to discover new resources to sustain ourselves. Fracking opened up new oil reserves, for sure, but that didn't mean that the concern wasn't valid. > It's going to be the same for every other resource. That's superstition / survivor bias. Is your statement that far off from "the house is on fire, but I'm not going to move from the couch because a fire crew will be here sooner or…

It is not remotely the same. Technologies in agriculture, energy production, and human health have all followed this path. By the way, it isn't just fracking that defeated calls of "peak oil" - deepwater drilling came the time before that, and offshore drilling the time before that, and so on. People have been crying "peak energy" and "peak food" reliably for the last 150 years, and we're still growing as a species.…

It's absolutely the same. You're predicting the future based upon the trajectory of the past. In 2019 you'd probably have ridiculed the idea of a pandemic occurring, based on us having "solved" the various outbreaks that took place in the prior 20 years; or in 2021 you'd have ridiculed the idea of a land war in Europe based on the relative peace achieved in the previous 70+ years.

The past 50 years have shown abundant evidence of us causing severe damage to the environment. Physics is finite, discoveries are finite, human ingenuity is finite. The chances of us being on a fantasy path of becoming magicians, able to conjure up anything our hearts desire, is low. There are bounds to reality.

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

#164

Post by xnx » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 1:40 PM UTC

orangepurple wrote: post #23

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…

Americans are saints when it comes to environmental destruction. Many African countries have very high birth rates and they do whatever it takes to survive, environment be damned, such as pouring used motor oil on the ground without batting and eye or thinking twice about the effects to their own health. Don't even get me started about the mining and deforestation.

The US outsources a lot of its polution.

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

#165

Post by ekianjo » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 1:52 PM UTC

grapeskin wrote: post #37

ekianjo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's not sustainable - 100 years ago people were saying we would all die from starvation after a few billion more people. Doom sayers have zero credibility.

Yes, that was before we manufactured fertilizer. If that invention didn't exist, this number absolutely wouldn't be sustainable. Soil is now becoming depleted and fertilizer isn't enough.[1] Globally, much also depends on rapidly depleting ground water that isn't being replenished. Agriculture is exceeding its limits. [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conserv...

> Yes, that was before we manufactured fertilizer. If that invention didn't exist, this number absolutely wouldn't be sustainable.

Hence proving the fact that we have no good insight of the future.

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

#166

Post by akudha » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

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 energy to achieve things

What things though? It is mostly materialistic, isn't it? We are more comfortable than ever. We can talk to a person on the other side of the planet anytime we want. Yet, we don't know our neighbors. More people are lonely, more people are single etc. We live longer today, yet my generation seems less happy than my parents' generation. When I was a 10 year old, I played outside all day. Can you imagine letting your 10 year old by himself, outside the house, all day today? We can't even be sure kids are safe in schools (though this particular problem is just American one).

On one side, we are relentlessly moving ahead, mostly materialistic. Fantastic communication tools, medical equipment etc. On the other side, people are obese, unhappy, unhealthy (mentally and physically).

We can't even a significant portion of the people accept that climate change issues are real and maybe slightly alter their lifestyle (eat less meat, less dairy, use less plastic...). How are you proposing to achieve any kind of cooperation between people when the population keeps going up?

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

#167

Post by stevenjgarner » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:07 PM UTC

ThalesX wrote: post #19

My great-grandma was born in 1920 and died in 2020. She was lucid to her final breath. I spent a lot of time talking to her about the ‘before times’. She was a sucker for this new world. She loved it. Much more than her world from the 20s. However, she always reminisced about how empty of people and how natural everything was. We were 1.6 billion when she was born, almost 8 when she died. This is the lifespan of a si…

Love it. Just before my grandmother died (89), I asked her what the biggest change was on the planet in her lifetime. She was silent for a moment and then gleefully blurted out "PLASTICS!".

She explained that when she was a girl "everything was made of something and someone knew how to do it". Now everything is just plastic.

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

#168

Post by hilbert42 » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:11 PM UTC

siva7 wrote: post #93

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?

I made no moral judgment whatsoever. I only stated what many who are much more knowledgeable than I am have said about the subject over the past 50 or more years.

Moreover, it's just a fact that people have been controlling population growth since before recorded history both at a family and state level - take China's one child policy for instance. I never even mentioned this let alone take a moral stand on the matter. Presumably, you would be much more critical of those who've actually acted to control population numbers rather than those who've just mentioned the subject.

What's more, the comment I made was a logical OR statement - that is either the world has the resources OR it doesn't, if it doesn't then the world has to do something about it, especially when exponential growth is involved.

What are your objections to that? And why are you so indignant and afraid of the subject that you want discussion about it shut down?

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

#169

Post by JaceLightning » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:30 PM UTC

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…

That's illogical thinking: should we increase our population by a factor of 10? To get 10x the Einsteins, Newtons, and Da Vinci's? By a factor of 100? 1000?

There will always be smart people and brilliant artists. If we reduce population, they will just come at a slower rate, which is fine. Will just make them more special when they do come.

I hate people and definitely would love to see fewer of them.

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

#170

Post by hilbert42 » Sat, Jul 02, 2022, 2:58 PM UTC

joshuahedlund wrote: post #114

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…

See the book More From Less for a counter-argument. Thanks to modern efficiencies and digitization a lot of resource use has decoupled from economic growth and some has actually peaked

"Thanks to modern efficiencies and digitization a lot of resource use has decoupled from economic growth..."

I'm aware of the counter argument but in the light of exponential growth of the population at what point does the graph of 'modern efficiencies' intersect with that of the exponential growth one?

Exponential growth has to stop somewhere as resources aren't infinite, so 'decoupling' cannot last forever.

Incidentally, I'm aware that some demographers have predicted a leveling off of exponential population growth in decades to come. For those who've implied (wrongly) that I've a hide to suggest limiting population growth I'd say that if or when exponential population growth does happen then they'd have to be critical of everyone involved in that turnaround (as it will require active participation of the population for that to happen).