Everyone ending up in stim tanks (hyper realistic immersive vr video games) and personal holodecks is as good for killing civilization as all out nuclear war.
Throughout history, the greatest thing that you can do to reduce reproduction rates is to increase the standard of living. It's the countries and people without water, sanitation an electricity where populations are increasing, not the high energy usage first world countries where populations are decreasing.
Americans are constantly, through their media (tv, newspapers and social media) force fed a diet that causes and enhances Dunning-Kruger syndrome. This is the new national psyche.
Most companies are corporations. It cost me $35 to start my own corporation a few years ago and have started a few since then.
When you start a corporation, you fill out a couple pages of forms, pay the license fee, send it in and the state (corporations are all at state, not national level) sends you back a license that you have to have displayed at the place of business and a million shares. There are at least 2 officers, president, vp, treasurer and secretary. One officer may hold more than one position, eg, vp and treasurer). The people decide among themselves how to split the shares. One share is one millionth of the company. Secretary records who owns the shares. Filling for a tax id # is separate from the corporation.
Each state has different requirements on what you have to do, obligations of the corporation, yearly fees (if any) that you have to pay. You can do whatever you want with the shares and can be distributed to up to 50 people. Eg, you could hire someone and in addition to their salary, you could also 'pay' them 10 shares per hour of work. But those shares have to come out of the original pool. Say you were president and got 500k shares to start (the business was your idea after all and you invented the widget that's now making the company $100k/year), so you get the largest number of shares. So after a year you've paid Bob $50k in cash and 20k shares of the company. You are 50k richer, but down to 480k shares of the company.
Same here. Most, if not all, of the contractors that I know feel the same way. Back before.com, one company was losing people who went freelance and had to make a rule that you could not come in as an independent for two years after working as a direct. You could have a two income family, one with benefits and the other bringing in major bank. It's still this way with most engineers I know.
It's not a physically impossible problem. There are enough resources on earth to build a nuclear power plant for ever 4 million or so people. And enough fuel to power them also.
I pointed out and provided a link that the continent of Africa is sufficient space to sustain that population. This leave all of Europe, Asia, South and most of North America for extra. But as you say: Politics, corruption, legal matters. These are engineering and not physical limit problems.
An interesting aside, you could fit the entire world population into Wisconsin with lower density than Manilla.
So is the developed world as a percentage of population.
The main reason for population growth right now is medicine and longer lifespans. If everyone would just die at 30 from an ingrown toenail infection, population wouldn't be growing. Also, there is a lot of unused space on Earth. You could fit 7 billion people in less than a quarter the area of the US with the same population density of Seattle. Africa alone has enough arable land to feed 7 billion people. Considering most people don't live in the US, this would seem like a lot of growing space.
Back in the 70s, space was mysterious. Everyone knew what a planet was, but nobody knew what they looked like.
Thanks to special effects, all that has changed. Now everyone knows what planets are like in distant galaxies and every few months are introduced to new ones. Space exploration can only offer the same boring places year after year and with cute, but tired names of rocks. Nobody is into that stuff except a few scientists and a group of scientist pretends.
Slashdot Mirror
Like Linus or RMS?
And if so, by how much?
Using one of my favourite rules from mathematics, L'Hôpital's rule, the lower bound is the cost of energy. Which is about $0.67/kg
Everyone ending up in stim tanks (hyper realistic immersive vr video games) and personal holodecks is as good for killing civilization as all out nuclear war.
With a high enough standard of living, I do. It's a belief backed up by almost every statistic on the matter and history.
Throughout history, the greatest thing that you can do to reduce reproduction rates is to increase the standard of living. It's the countries and people without water, sanitation an electricity where populations are increasing, not the high energy usage first world countries where populations are decreasing.
Americans are constantly, through their media (tv, newspapers and social media) force fed a diet that causes and enhances Dunning-Kruger syndrome. This is the new national psyche.
One's gain is only made possible by another's loss.
If I buy a loaf of bread for $1, who gains and who loses? I lose $1 and gain a loaf of bread. The baker gains $1 and loses a load of bread.
Each state has different requirements on what you have to do, obligations of the corporation, yearly fees (if any) that you have to pay. You can do whatever you want with the shares and can be distributed to up to 50 people. Eg, you could hire someone and in addition to their salary, you could also 'pay' them 10 shares per hour of work. But those shares have to come out of the original pool. Say you were president and got 500k shares to start (the business was your idea after all and you invented the widget that's now making the company $100k/year), so you get the largest number of shares. So after a year you've paid Bob $50k in cash and 20k shares of the company. You are 50k richer, but down to 480k shares of the company.
I look at it from a longer term perspective than you. There are 3 billion people out there without electricity, clean water or sanitation.
In the late 90s, you could make $60 an hour creating 'home pages' for people on yahoo profiles.
from a country with a much lower standard of living
Does this raise or lower the standard of living in those places?`
Maybe to build up the economy in wherever and open a park there.
first to actually manage a fully reusable rocket
Well, them and spaceship one a decade ago (I was there).
Details are for engineers and losers.
Yeah, but who's counting?
Same here. Most, if not all, of the contractors that I know feel the same way. Back before .com, one company was losing people who went freelance and had to make a rule that you could not come in as an independent for two years after working as a direct. You could have a two income family, one with benefits and the other bringing in major bank. It's still this way with most engineers I know.
pros should prepare themselves for the dynamics of a world that depends more on contingent work
Nothing new here
It doesn't even qualify as news that matters
vital to sustain a population.
It's not a physically impossible problem. There are enough resources on earth to build a nuclear power plant for ever 4 million or so people. And enough fuel to power them also.
What about the toil of environmental problems?
I pointed out and provided a link that the continent of Africa is sufficient space to sustain that population. This leave all of Europe, Asia, South and most of North America for extra. But as you say: Politics, corruption, legal matters. These are engineering and not physical limit problems.
An interesting aside, you could fit the entire world population into Wisconsin with lower density than Manilla.
The main reason for population growth right now is medicine and longer lifespans. If everyone would just die at 30 from an ingrown toenail infection, population wouldn't be growing. Also, there is a lot of unused space on Earth. You could fit 7 billion people in less than a quarter the area of the US with the same population density of Seattle. Africa alone has enough arable land to feed 7 billion people. Considering most people don't live in the US, this would seem like a lot of growing space.
As the human population grows
Human population is shrinking in the developed world. There's no reason to believe that trend won't continue.
80% of them both don't give a shit about
That's less than the number of pro space people who know anything about physics or engineering. Or space for that matter. It's a cargo cult to most.
Thanks to special effects, all that has changed. Now everyone knows what planets are like in distant galaxies and every few months are introduced to new ones. Space exploration can only offer the same boring places year after year and with cute, but tired names of rocks. Nobody is into that stuff except a few scientists and a group of scientist pretends.
The most anti-NASA people are people who have worked for NASA.