Zuckerberg: can my $3bn clear the world of diseases

Zuckerberg: can my $3bn clear the world of diseases

Author
Discussion

richardxjr

7,561 posts

209 months

Monday 26th September 2016
quotequote all
^ Best Lurking EVER

clap

Art0ir

9,401 posts

169 months

Monday 26th September 2016
quotequote all
All for it.

Joe Rogan calls them "Billion Dollar Problems". Things we take for granted in life that could be solved by some obscenely wealthy philanthropist.

Talksteer

4,843 posts

232 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Art0ir said:
All for it.

Joe Rogan calls them "Billion Dollar Problems". Things we take for granted in life that could be solved by some obscenely wealthy philanthropist.
On a similar note Reaction Engines were laying out how they will spend 100million in the next few years to develop a prototype engine capable of going from a runway to orbit.

Revolutionary Space transport for the cost of employing three middling premiership footballers for three years.

Terminator X

14,922 posts

203 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Stopping people dying is bound to end well ...



TX.

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

253 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Stooping people getting disease wont stop them dying, eventually.

We're approaching a cusp of great change all round, change is accelerating. With advances in dna engineering, retroviruses, nanotechnology, AI and computing power etc theres a lot possible. Who knows $3bn may be enough to kick start a step change that existing research isnt looking at

Efbe

9,251 posts

165 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Terminator X said:
Stopping people dying is bound to end well ...



TX.
curious as to why they would expect the projection to start scaling down against the very obvious trend

hoagypubdog

590 posts

143 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Call me stupid, but I thought famine and disease was natures way of controlling population....

SystemParanoia

14,343 posts

197 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Efbe said:
Terminator X said:
Stopping people dying is bound to end well ...



TX.
curious as to why they would expect the projection to start scaling down against the very obvious trend
Large quantities of people shipped off to mars colonies and/or into generation ships headed off to Proxima B

Terminator X

14,922 posts

203 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
RobDickinson said:
Stooping people getting disease wont stop them dying, eventually.

We're approaching a cusp of great change all round, change is accelerating. With advances in dna engineering, retroviruses, nanotechnology, AI and computing power etc theres a lot possible. Who knows $3bn may be enough to kick start a step change that existing research isnt looking at
So if people aren't dying because the world is disease free and instead living longer do you think the population of the world will increase, decrease or stay the same?

TX.

Talksteer

4,843 posts

232 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Efbe said:
Terminator X said:
Stopping people dying is bound to end well ...



TX.
curious as to why they would expect the projection to start scaling down against the very obvious trend
If you trend population growth eventually it predicts human population going to zero in a few hundred years.

As people get richer they have less kids the average family in the world today is two kids. More of the world is getting richer.

Population probably peaks in the middle of the century.

Efbe

9,251 posts

165 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Talksteer said:
Efbe said:
Terminator X said:
Stopping people dying is bound to end well ...



TX.
curious as to why they would expect the projection to start scaling down against the very obvious trend
If you trend population growth eventually it predicts human population going to zero in a few hundred years.

As people get richer they have less kids the average family in the world today is two kids. More of the world is getting richer.

Population probably peaks in the middle of the century.
an alternative way of looking at this, and generalising by using 1-3rd world terminology which is at best rubbish...

... is that countries such as China and India have fuelled this growth whilst they are in second world conditions. As they move into first world conditions their population growth slows.

But much of africa and south america is still in third world conditions, yet to move up to second world conditions. When this happens, population growth will accelerate once more?

Randy Winkman

16,021 posts

188 months

Tuesday 27th September 2016
quotequote all
Efbe said:
Talksteer said:
Efbe said:
Terminator X said:
Stopping people dying is bound to end well ...



TX.
curious as to why they would expect the projection to start scaling down against the very obvious trend
If you trend population growth eventually it predicts human population going to zero in a few hundred years.

As people get richer they have less kids the average family in the world today is two kids. More of the world is getting richer.

Population probably peaks in the middle of the century.
an alternative way of looking at this, and generalising by using 1-3rd world terminology which is at best rubbish...

... is that countries such as China and India have fuelled this growth whilst they are in second world conditions. As they move into first world conditions their population growth slows.

But much of africa and south america is still in third world conditions, yet to move up to second world conditions. When this happens, population growth will accelerate once more?
I'm not sure it will have much effect since most of the world's people are in Asia and have already got there. It's all in here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UbmG8gtBPM