• TechLich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Yeah, population sizes overall would have been much smaller in the past, so paleolithic times would probably be comparitively insignificant (even 2000 years ago the entire population was less than 200 million and now it’s 8 billion more than that).

    I wonder if you could get a very rough statistical estimate of humanity’s downfall just by assuming that we are somewhere in the middle of history. Like if I was born as a random person, I’m more likely to be born at a time where more people are born than when few people are born. So if you model that and make some assumptions about population growth/decline rates, could you put some numbers on when the last person is likely to be born within a margin of error?

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Yeah, population sizes overall would have been much smaller in the past, so paleolithic times would probably be comparitively insignificant (even 2000 years ago the entire population was less than 200 million and now it’s 8 billion more than that).

      True, but it was also an unfathomably long time, so IIRC it cancels out. Uhh… nope, I remembered wrong. Per OurWorldInData, pre-agricultural people about equal living people in count, meaning about 15% of the total. I’ll cross that out.

      I wonder if you could get a very rough statistical estimate of humanity’s downfall just by assuming that we are somewhere in the middle of history

      I feel like I’ve seen this done. Yep, it looks like it was a guy named Richard Gott that first wrote about it in the 90’s with respect to population, while the whole concept is called Lindy’s law.