5 ms·
I disagree, it’s too soon to tell whether the prediction is accurate. Maybe it’s obvious to you, but I’d at least like to see that prediction justified. I don’t
by zach_miller 3y ago
I disagree, it’s too soon to tell whether the prediction is accurate. Maybe it’s obvious to you, but I’d at least like to see that prediction justified. I don’t see how accepting an unjustified opinion is thinking.
- cubefox 3y agoThe future world population can be predicted fairly far in advance (many decades) because it depends on current fertility rates and the fact that life expectancy doesn't change drastically. And even fertility rates follow predicable trends.
- jahav 3y agoThat assumes that new humans can be only by women. There is no reason, why artificial womb, possibly with multiple selection box for genes, is not a very realistic possibility, along with state funded child rearing services. (see Norway)
- cubefox 3y agoYou mean a government agency will produce children? Why would the population vote for funding this if they don't want children themselves?
- jahav 3y ago1. Reproduction is already heavily subsidized in many countries, be it direct grants, tax breats and so on. This is nothing new. 2. Most people actually want children. Getting someone to actually procreate with that will share burden. 3. Investing in children should hel to fund future pension payments. There is pretty good case for self-interest. 4. China won't care, neither will Russia or other parts of world. 5. Countries that will do that will have a better outcome than countries full of retirees. Unless AI takes over, natural selection will take care of rest
- cubefox 3y agoIf this happens, I assume Chinese breeding facilities will optimize for producing children with high cognitive ability. Via selective breeding, embryo selection, or genetic engineering.
- aa1234556 3y ago[dead]