I really don’t remember. This was from a college class decades ago. I am sure it is out of date and am hoping for better estimates. I will look for it myself, but i was hoping the person whose comment I replied to might have some links.
Simulation6
Don’t get distracted, the European comment was just because I get tired of the whole ‘our shit doesn’t stink’ attitude.
You take that back!
[citation needed]
3 billion was an estimate for long term sustainable population size with first world living standards (Europeans are just as bad as Americans for the planet). If you mean surviving at subsistence levels then that number can go up a lot, but you have to accept droughts and natural disasters killing lots of people from time to time.
If these estimates have changed I would like to update my understanding.
I read a book from the 80s (may have been Engines of Creation) where they talked about forever machines. Materials science and design advanced to the point where appliances and vehicles would last for centuries.
In some books they mess up the facial recognition cameras by applying some makeup that makes the cameras see them as someone else. Is that possible and would it be possible to have it scan as the Guy Faulks madk?
Hanged! And then to be fined 30$
I thought it said step brother at first and thought i was on the wrong tab.
Rockabilly! That’s what it’s called. I had a hard time finding a pic. I love that subculture. It’s like the hon subculture in Baltimore, everybody dresses up and has fun.
Might be useful in some extreme environments, like deep sea exploration or planetary probes. Of course that depends on if the rest of the probe can survive.
For the population link, the arguments make no sense to me. Population growth is slowing, but is still going up. There is not enough resources to support 9 billion people unless most of them live at a low level. There is more then just energy included in ‘resources’ so no amount of solar power fixes the issue long term currently.