To be frank, I don’t know. I just think we are in a situation where we can rule out some of the possibilities by making comparisons between earlier societies and today, as well as different countries. For example, if we assume that bad living conditions are the root cause, then we have the problem that in earlier societies with much less wealth, that has been more demanding for the average person, people tended to have more children. In addition, we see that people in quite poor countries have a lot of children. You could save the assumption by adding a hypothesis like “if people know that life could be better but cannot achieve that better life, they are less likely to have children”. While this might work, we must note that inequality was even worse in earlier societies. The difference between a peasant and a member of the nobility may have been much greater than the inequality we see today (within most socienties). Maybe the peasant wasn’t aware of it, or whatever.

Anyway, you need a more complex theory in this case.

Can this pages change to eucariotic lifeforms like human cells?

I quoted the article in order to comment:

One company is aiming to treat infections with a different strategy: arming tiny viruses called bacteriophages with Crispr.

I checked it just out: CRISPR is already part of the intra-celluar immun system of baacterias and archaea.

Whereas antibiotics kill bacteria indiscriminately—including the beneficial kind—phages have evolved to be selective in the strains or species of bacteria they target.

So, the phages would not attacke the “good” bacteria within the stomach but the evil ones. Could be a great idea.

1. They do address
2. This not the cause anyway.

Sounds like a lot of hight mathematics.

Its really a interesting piece. Thanks!

But this can be the causal root of the recent changes. Populations aren’t declining because of famine, but because people aren’t having more children.

Your argument need some middle step or mediator like “people already realizing the comming problems and react with getting less childeren”. But is this really the case? I mean, we observe the decline even in places like north korea or by groups who denied clima change or simply don’t care.

Maybe, the emerging problems of clima change are part of the creation of a pessimistic worldview or something.

Capitalism is growth based. It requires infinite growth in order to operate normally, and we are on a finite planet.

I see your point but for “academic reasons”, is there any proof of this claim.

Nothing within socialism points to growth of any kind, and well-structured socialism can even function well under degrowth conditions.

have to disagree strongly.

• Older individuals needs help from the socity in order to survive and have goods like clothes and so on.
• The help in questions has to be provided my at least middle aged individuals. They must spend resources like money, energy etc. on it.
• If you have significant more older individuals than younger ones, you got a really problem with the resources.

Even a socialistic society has to follow this logic since their resources, like the workforce of younger people, are limited.

The situation we’ll face in the near future, the situation of having more and more older individuals, while we need resources for a lot of other fields like AI, political stuff and clima, would be problem in any human society. In every society which suffer the problem of limited resources.

Agree to disagree?

capitalism is not the problem here, sorry.

The same problem would arise in a hypothetical socialist socity.

IMHO, a UBI is just an option in the case that all production is made by machines. If a sector of people is still forced to work, they will not accapt it.

Services like nurses or that like may be something other…

We’ll have far more infra and a far lower population.

Nope. We will have a lot of older people who need the help of younger people in order to get things like medical aid, food and so on. And we will have lesser and lesser young people to provide these goods. To make matters worse, the younger generation has to deal with issues like maintaining infrastructure, building new technologies, and fighting the unwelcome effects of climate crises.

In a word: If utopia has a chance to happen, it will make us wait for almost 2 decades. No guarantee that utopia will ever happen. History knows not one example of population declaine without a collaps. Captialism isn’t the issue here.

He or she doesn’t want it.

Its a very, very uncomfortable truth. The older generations needs the workforce of younger generations in order to get things like good, medical help and other things. This work will not getting lower about decades.

Could you please explain one thing to me: How does climate change cause the current population decline?

The EU usually regulates too much, not too little.

Many so called “deep fakes” are in fact just pardies, pieces of art and so on putting withour the context or reclaimed with another backstroy.

The initial case to creat a picture may be legit, while a internet troll or even a actuall agent with an political agency use the pic out of context.

Lets provide an example. Lets say I would make a caricature of a politican for a meme. After that, somebody else comming, taking the caricature and make something different out of it. Fake News for instance. Where comes the problem with “deep fakes” in? As far as I see, Fair Use protects the first step. Its allowed to make caricatures from politicans. The second step doesn’t actually make a deep fake, just use a picture that was there before.

Yet againt. More power for the EU central gouverment and their officials and authorities. I don’t see a change in favour of the usual citizen, here.

I have to link this here: https://futurology.today/post/549960

As far as I read, its more an opinioned essay about the political influence of some silicon vally cooperations. I think, these “companies will be more important than states”-thing is over. We all has become witnesses for the importance of policies on a state level in the last decade. It’s not over for them, like it or not.

Now that we have entered a new period of political tension at the global level, I think the role of states will be even more important. An interesting side note: the institution of the European Union has failed to create a strategy to respond to the current war in Ukraine. So, the idea of super-national institutions like the EU or whatever, seems unlikely to be a solution to the problem of global coordination and cooperation as humanity. Again, like it or dislike it. I’m pretty sure many international observers has already note this and drawt their conclusions.

Ty