this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024
596 points (99.2% liked)

Damn, that's interesting!

4430 readers
1 users here now

  1. No clickbait
  2. No Racism and Hate speech
  3. No Imgur Gallery Links
  4. No Infographics
  5. Moderator Discretion
  6. Repost Guidelines
  7. No videos over 15 minutes long
  8. No "Photoshopped" posts
  9. Image w/ text posts must be sourced in comments

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheFriar@lemm.ee 3 points 6 days ago

About half of people that have ever lived have died

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago

Technically if estimates are accurate we are all a four-point-something billion old unbroken chain of reproduction.

[–] Blaze@reddthat.com 2 points 6 days ago

Interesting visual, crossposting this to !dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz

[–] ramirezmike@programming.dev 42 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You are here

dang, how does it know, that's crazy

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They track your phone idiot

[–] SurpriZe@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] SurpriZe@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago

I leave my devices unvaccinated, thanks

[–] ThisIsNecessary@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago

I always wanted to see this visualized.

[–] LittleBorat2@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 week ago (7 children)

The visualization is strange for this because the hour glass implies that the is a finite number of humans that can live but at the same time it is refilled from the top continously.

What happens in a billion years will it overflow?

Am I the only one with this problem?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Currently our world wide birthrate is trending towards an average of 1.9-2.1 children per woman, which is basically just enough to maintain a stable population. The main reason we exploded in population in the last couple centuries is that our kids stopped dying so frequently, so as people notice that they no longer need to have 15 kids so that 3 of them make it to puberty, they stop having huge families.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Then God will turn it over and it starts going backwards. All the dead people will be born again in reverse order, it's gonna be real weird.

[–] debil@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Phew, luckily religion has all the answers.

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What happens in a billion years will it overflow?

They’ll just draw it bigger.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

We’ll just add a zero to each of the population counts.

“Each grain of sand represents 100 million people …”

[–] Somethingcheezie@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe we die out because we failed to take care of the planet.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 6 days ago

More like because we failed to take care of ourselves, by taking care of the biosphere we relied on to stay alive.

[–] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well. Human societies have an upper limit on the amount of population they can sustain, determined by their access to natural resources, technology, and social organization.

Malthus got a lot of shit because he came up with his theories exactly when civilization was entering into a period where the advancements in technology were drastically expanding those limits, and because his ideas were instrumentalized by a lot of unsavory types, but he did find a (very incomplete) segment of truth.

Right now, the biggest danger of it all becoming relevant again is the possibility that sustained ecological disaster might dramatically lower our population upper limit without us having the capacity to react fast enough.

[–] volodya_ilich@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

Human societies have an upper limit on the amount of population they can sustain, determined by their access to natural resources, technology, and social organization

But that would be represented in this analogy by a limited size on the top half of the hourglass, not the bottom one.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

i think it won't be long before we just blow up the whole hourglass with strategic nukes

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

continue to not have any kids

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

That's a good visual

[–] joneskind@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What is considered Human here? Homo Sapiens Sapiens?

Anyway, cool graph

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

And Neanderthals

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago

Flipping it right now

[–] Moonworm@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Kind of makes me think about comparing the very fucking long period of time before agriculture where humans were just monkeying about compared to the shorter period of time afterward with a lot more people and then even the relatively quite fucking short modern period with even so many more people. When you think about the rate of change of human living, for instance, how fast it is now; is that just because there's so many more of us? I mean there's more of us because of things like the agricultural and industrial revolutions, but is it also a bit of a feedback loop? There are perhaps some frightening connotations to that - but to say my actual point, maybe it's appropriate to think about the "amount" of history in human-years rather than just years.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

It’s weird because it means the most common human experience ever will soon include xboxes and doordash.

[–] muhyb@programming.dev 4 points 1 week ago

Homo sapiens?

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Huh. Didn't think there'd been that many of us already. Neat.

load more comments
view more: next ›