Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 1701 1702 [1703] 1704 1705 ... 3511

Author Topic: AmeriPol thread  (Read 3534500 times)

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25530 on: November 12, 2018, 11:33:30 am »

Funnily enough the US falls into the category of "below replacement", but the population still increases due to immigration. And a damn good thing that is, too. Imagine the social security issues if the population was actually declining.
So the US population has to increase indefinitely while the rest of the world decreases theirs? Really makes me thing hmmm

scriver

  • Bay Watcher
  • City streets ain't got much pity
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25531 on: November 12, 2018, 11:36:07 am »

The genocide of native Americans will never stop
Logged
Love, scriver~

MorleyDev

  • Bay Watcher
  • "It is not enough for it to just work."
    • View Profile
    • MorleyDev
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25532 on: November 12, 2018, 11:41:28 am »

So the US population has to increase indefinitely while the rest of the world decreases theirs? Really makes me thing hmmm

I mean, it's more like "The west's population has to increase indefinitely while the rest of the world flees to the west because the other countries keep getting exploded".

UK: 1.80 births per woman (2016)
USA: 1.80 births per woman (2016)
Germany: 1.50 births per woman (2016)
France: 1.96 births per woman (2016)
Hungary: 1.45 births per woman (2016)
Belgium: 1.70 births per woman (2016)
Ireland: 1.92 births per woman (2016)

Urbanisation and access to contraceptives means less women are choosing to have lots of human beings scream their way out their genitals.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 11:47:16 am by MorleyDev »
Logged

Egan_BW

  • Bay Watcher
  • Perhaps I'll
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25533 on: November 12, 2018, 11:44:30 am »

The human population can't just keep increasing forever. Especially if you want to let the rest of the biosphere live and not just be literal and metaphorical fuel for our expansion. We are already crowding things out, we are an extinction event. But even if you only care about your own species, we will still run into limits eventually. And the consequences of destabilizing the biosphere.

Regardless of how many people we have now (much, much more than is normal for an animal of our size) we will need to reach an equilibrium state eventually. That or periods of growth followed by massive die offs, but I'd prefer the equilibrium.
Logged
Down at the bottom of the ocean. Beneath tons of brine which would crush you down. Not into broken and splintered flesh, but into thin soup. Into just more of the sea water. Where things live that aren't so different from you, but you will never live to touch them and they will never live to touch you.

Gentlefish

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING: balloon-like qualities]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25534 on: November 12, 2018, 11:45:20 am »

Why do we name hurricanes, but not wildfires?

California's wildfire death toll is up to 31, with over 200 people still unaccounted for.
Hurricane Florence claimed 53 lives, and Michael 36.
Fire vs Water, which is the deadliest element?

They are named, just usually by location. Hurricane naming started, I think, because a forecaster took to it one year and it just stuck.

MorleyDev

  • Bay Watcher
  • "It is not enough for it to just work."
    • View Profile
    • MorleyDev
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25535 on: November 12, 2018, 11:50:06 am »

Regardless of how many people we have now (much, much more than is normal for an animal of our size) we will need to reach an equilibrium state eventually. That or periods of growth followed by massive die offs, but I'd prefer the equilibrium.

Or, space. I've been thinking, with all the talk of Mars and all, that if we can figure out how to build large orbital habitats fit for long-term human habitation, population size stops even being a thing and you can just build more habitats. There's always more space in space, and no localised disaster can wipe out a species spread over thousands of giant space stations.

And if we could achieve that, then why even bother colonising other planets at that point?
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 11:53:50 am by MorleyDev »
Logged

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25536 on: November 12, 2018, 11:54:25 am »

Why do we name hurricanes, but not wildfires?

California's wildfire death toll is up to 31, with over 200 people still unaccounted for.
Hurricane Florence claimed 53 lives, and Michael 36.
Fire vs Water, which is the deadliest element?

They DO have names, generally named for the location that they start in, but theres no 'wildfire naming committee'.

*tries to head off the derail*

It begins!.....

We've got our second person officially running for President in 2020, a guy with a spanish sounding name that isn't actually latino. He may actually be part latino for all I know as I know nothing about the guy. Only time I've ever heard his name is from an article a week or two ago saying that he said 'People will know my name!'. Any West Virginians around here that can shed a bit of light on him?

The first one is some Maryland lawmaker named John Delaney or something who entered last year, but candidates are REALLY going to start coming out of the woodwork to announce as soon as they can.
Logged

Trekkin

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25537 on: November 12, 2018, 11:55:30 am »

Or, space.
And we're paying to get that much mass (in the form of people and other requisite biomatter just to seed the habitats, if nothing else) out of our gravity well...how?
Logged

Rowanas

  • Bay Watcher
  • I must be going senile.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25538 on: November 12, 2018, 11:56:54 am »

Regardless of how many people we have now (much, much more than is normal for an animal of our size) we will need to reach an equilibrium state eventually. That or periods of growth followed by massive die offs, but I'd prefer the equilibrium.

Or, space. I've been thinking, with all the talk of Mars and all, that if we can figure out how to build large orbital habitats fit for long-term human habitation, population size stops even being a thing and you can just build more habitats. There's always more space in space, and no localised disaster can wipe out a species spread over thousands of giant space stations.

And if we could achieve that, then why even bother colonising other planets at that point?

There are still limited resources within our solar system, and beyond that and beyond that.  Resources arealways limited eventually, we shouldn't be basing our estimation of human success by how many people we can pop out.
Logged
I agree with Urist. Steampunk is like Darth Vader winning Holland's Next Top Model. It would be awesome but not something I'd like in this game.
Unfortunately dying involves the amputation of the entire body from the dwarf.

Gentlefish

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING: balloon-like qualities]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25539 on: November 12, 2018, 11:58:57 am »

Regardless of how many people we have now (much, much more than is normal for an animal of our size) we will need to reach an equilibrium state eventually. That or periods of growth followed by massive die offs, but I'd prefer the equilibrium.

Or, space. I've been thinking, with all the talk of Mars and all, that if we can figure out how to build large orbital habitats fit for long-term human habitation, population size stops even being a thing and you can just build more habitats. There's always more space in space, and no localised disaster can wipe out a species spread over thousands of giant space stations.

And if we could achieve that, then why even bother colonising other planets at that point?

There are still limited resources within our solar system, and beyond that and beyond that.  Resources arealways limited eventually, we shouldn't be basing our estimation of human success by how many people we can pop out.
I agree. We should base human success by our technological footprint. In other words, time to harvest the asteroid belt for enough material to make that dyson sphere. (no but seriously as soon as we start harvesting material from space, ecological preservation will become so much easier)

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25540 on: November 12, 2018, 12:00:46 pm »

Regardless of how many people we have now (much, much more than is normal for an animal of our size) we will need to reach an equilibrium state eventually. That or periods of growth followed by massive die offs, but I'd prefer the equilibrium.

Or, space. I've been thinking, with all the talk of Mars and all, that if we can figure out how to build large orbital habitats fit for long-term human habitation, population size stops even being a thing and you can just build more habitats. There's always more space in space, and no localised disaster can wipe out a species spread over thousands of giant space stations.

And if we could achieve that, then why even bother colonising other planets at that point?

There are still limited resources within our solar system, and beyond that and beyond that.  Resources arealways limited eventually, we shouldn't be basing our estimation of human success by how many people we can pop out.

Finite, yes, but the resources are in huge numbers, and we can always move to another galaxy like an all-consuming swarm or something. It's still possible for resources to become locally scarce however.

I suppose we can rerail this?
Logged

Maximum Spin

  • Bay Watcher
  • [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] [GOES_TO_ELEVEN]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25541 on: November 12, 2018, 12:01:42 pm »

This doesn't seem derailed at all. Space colonisation is a topic of American politics.
Logged

MorleyDev

  • Bay Watcher
  • "It is not enough for it to just work."
    • View Profile
    • MorleyDev
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25542 on: November 12, 2018, 12:05:07 pm »

Or, space.
And we're paying to get that much mass (in the form of people and other requisite biomatter just to seed the habitats, if nothing else) out of our gravity well...how?

The current goal is the cost down of launching below a certain threshold, which I can't remember off the top of my head but I think it's like $2000 a kg? Either way, it's the point at which asteroid mining becomes profitable.

Then you can start to bring it down further by those mining companies pouring more into researching orbital refinement and construction, meaning people can work in space for longer periods and from more industries (since refined goods sell for more than unrefined).

The influx of resources and ability to construct large-scale constructions in space, coupled with the further advances in launch methods a large-scale industry would bring, means it's not an unfeasible future technology path.

I didn't say it'd happen soon, just that it's a path we can take that doesn't require artificially limiting human population. Refuting the suggestion that humanity would eventually need to limit it's population. There's enough resources in Mercury alone to last a loooong time, and we`re already starting to bring down the cost of space launches per kg.

I mean, eventually the sun will die and it'll all be pointless anyway unless we figure out interstellar travel. But, ya know. One problem at a time.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 12:09:33 pm by MorleyDev »
Logged

Kagus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Olive oil. Don't you?
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25543 on: November 12, 2018, 12:05:45 pm »

We have Ronald the Ray-Gun to thank for that.


Resources arealways limited eventually, we shouldn't be basing our estimation of human success by how many people we can pop out.
The solution is, obviously, to construct these spacefaring bioplatforms out of more humans.

Egan_BW

  • Bay Watcher
  • Perhaps I'll
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #25544 on: November 12, 2018, 12:06:49 pm »

Regardless of how many people we have now (much, much more than is normal for an animal of our size) we will need to reach an equilibrium state eventually. That or periods of growth followed by massive die offs, but I'd prefer the equilibrium.

Or, space. I've been thinking, with all the talk of Mars and all, that if we can figure out how to build large orbital habitats fit for long-term human habitation, population size stops even being a thing and you can just build more habitats. There's always more space in space, and no localised disaster can wipe out a species spread over thousands of giant space stations.

And if we could achieve that, then why even bother colonising other planets at that point?

Because we currently have one way to actually get up there without falling back down, and rockets aren't practical to transport any meaningful amount of the human population. It would be vastly more expensive to export our excess humans than it would be to just. Not make them in the first place.
There are theoretical technologies that could make that easier. But they are theoretical, so we can't just count on a space elevator breakthrough solving our launch problems any more than we can count on a cold fusion breakthrough to solve our energy problems. Might happen, some day. Don't count on it happening in time.
Logged
Down at the bottom of the ocean. Beneath tons of brine which would crush you down. Not into broken and splintered flesh, but into thin soup. Into just more of the sea water. Where things live that aren't so different from you, but you will never live to touch them and they will never live to touch you.
Pages: 1 ... 1701 1702 [1703] 1704 1705 ... 3511