5 ms·
If the number active (alive) Facebook users grows at a sufficient exponential rate, e.g. each new generation has at least 2× the users of the last generation, t
by alanh 16y ago
If the number active (alive) Facebook users grows at a sufficient exponential rate, e.g. each new generation has at least 2× the users of the last generation, then the answer would be “never”
Edit: Um, humans do grow in population in an exponential pattern… how long do you think the population has been at 6.8 billion?
- Psyonic 16y agoLast I checked humans are limited in supply. AI users though...
- eru 16y agoCurrently there are many zero AIs, as far as we know.
- tmorgan 16y agoWell, populations are typically modeled as a sigmoid function, they only appear to be growing exponentially. I think it's fair to assume total population will stabilise whilst we are still resource limited to Earth.
- jules 16y agoIt seems that we are at the inflection point of the sigmoid: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/World-Population-1800-2100.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/World-Pop...
- shasta 16y agoReassuring to see that the UN doesn't predict any large discontinuities in that graph
- j_baker 16y agoThe last estimate I seem to find on the subject said that the population should level off at 10 billion in 2200. Granted, this is from 1999: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/sixbillion/sixbilpart1.pdf http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/sixbillion/six...
- ImperatorLunae 16y agoHumans do not necessarily reproduce exponentially. Hans Rosling's TED talks feature, as a central theme, that the population can stabilize at 9 billion with the right initiatives and social changes. http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_g...
- alanh 16y agoMy post starts with "If". (I imagine the possibility of a singularity and the consequent interstellar expansions and/or virtual entities.)