And I think all this decentralization leads to greater security concerns.

And I think all this decentralization leads to greater security concerns.

Agreed. I refuse to store any of my data in the cloud. I'm looking into building my own cloud in my home.

Since the demize of Bell Labs I expect that there will be fewer and far-between basic breakthroughs in technology, economics, astronomy, physics, and even communications.

No more things like cell phones, transistors, big bangs, lasers, mazers, computing algorithms etc.

All of these advances lead to the need for fewer people, not more. Unfortunately the world's population continues to grow. Some people see a future where all this advancement will support a planetary population of over 10 billion, all of whom are fed and happy. I don't see that as a realistic possibility. And I'm glad I won't be here in the middle of it.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

All of these advances lead to the need for fewer people, not more. Unfortunately the world's population continues to grow. Some people see a future where all this advancement will support a planetary population of over 10 billion, all of whom are fed and happy. I don't see that as a realistic possibility. And I'm glad I won't be here in the middle of it.

They said that when the spinning jenny (1764) and all the other machines invented at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So nothing new then.

All of these advances lead to the need for fewer people

I will invent a machine that does the work of ten men, It will take 12 people to operate and maintain it.

There's another aspect of increasing population size -- automation resulting
in jobs, with everyone fed, etc.: Population stress. If anyone has ever raised
tropical fish (I did, in HS years.), there is a "magic number", above which
the fish die back, with a myriad of diseases (auto-immune induced). Deaths
would result, even though an adequate amount of feed, plant life, etc.
were provided.

When the magic number was, again, passed, in the negative direction,
deaths would stop. Fish's immune systems are similar to humans, and
I feel that to cross our line, is to flirt with the unknown.

Better, to limit population increase by popular consensus. Don't
suggest wars -- they couldn't begin to keep up with the world's birth-rate.

---

There is only one group of people who are making a deliberate effort to produce fewer babies and I'll let you all guess who that is and isn't. Think about how that will affect the decision makers of the future.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

There is only one group of people who are making a deliberate effort to produce fewer babies and I'll let you all guess who that is and isn't. Think about how that will affect the decision makers of the future.

Why be mysterious?

GLBTs produce fewer babies. (I'll let you guess why that is, lol!)
And some educated people produce fewer babies.

And some educated people produce fewer babies.

I'll go further and say most educated people produce less babies, and that population growth in most English speaking countries and northern European countries is due to immigration and that those immigrants tend to have more children than the ethnic population.

Migration Observatory - Oxford University

However, the decreasing size of the UK-born female population of reproductive age and changes in its age structure have brought about a reduction in the number of births, so that the overall contribution of foreign-born women to the increase in number of births has been estimated at 65% (Tromans et al. 2009: 33).

It should also be noted that Scotland's population growth is at best stagnant and probably negative, as they don't have many immigrants.

edit] I suspect the US is in a similar position, as I have seen reports that one reason the Republicans are struggling to recruit voters is because the US is getting to the tipping point where the non-white population will outnumber the whites.

There is only one group of people who are making a deliberate effort to produce fewer babies and I'll let you all guess who that is and isn't. Think about how that will affect the decision makers of the future.

I can't be blamed for that 1 as I'm accountable for 7 here (that I know of, but that's another story) and my dear departed missus had 1 before we had our last 3 (8 in total), but now they actually pay people here to have kids here which I think is totally wrong (we never got paid to produce).

I however do feel that advances in some areas are greatly slowing down (in fact some are actually going backwards IMO) just to accommodate a more mobile market, but I'm sure that (just like in the past) a surge of technology will hit us again (over the endless refinements that we have been getting lately).

Cheers.

And some educated people produce fewer babies.

I'll go further and say most educated people produce less babies ... .

I hesitated to put that qualifier, most, and put some, because I had not looked at numbers recently.

I suspect the US is in a similar position, as I have seen reports that one reason the Republicans are struggling to recruit voters is because the US is getting to the tipping point where the non-white population will outnumber the whites.

I have heard similar suggestions. However, this is not to say that all Hispanics, for example, go Democrat.