- cross-posted to:
- lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/68343929
You must log in or register to comment.
Aside from birthrates… maybe not such a bad idea. Go out and learn how to talk to actual people and whatnot.
Have you seen people? No thanks.
AI is no better.
Not really as simple as that, especially since the corporations and governments botch everything everywhere. There are of course other factors.
Declining birth rates has more to do with the fact that we live in a fucked up world. AI chatbot lovers is also probably a symptom of that. Not surprised goverments barking at the wrong tree though
I don’t think this tracks.
The countries with the highest fertility rates are some of the poorest, most fucked up, with the worst conditions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate
Evolution of societal norms for all sorts of reasons seems to be a much bigger factor.
Yeah I am aware of this fact too. The effect of sentiments about life and economic level are I think interleaved in someways. Sentiments about life might have a bigger effect when you are in a certain economically comfortable zone that you can really start to think about how the future of the world will effect your life. In fucked up places, people just live day to day and are in survival mode. I believe I have once read something that goes along the lines of “poorer demographics generally have tendency to make more children because they think that more children is the most sure way to secure their near future for when they get older”. Another possibility is that in a certain comfortable economic zone you have more time and opportunity to receive knowledge about what is going on in the world at large and therefore get psychologically affected by it more. In survival mode you don’t have much other chance than really just thinking about day to day businesses.
In fucked up places, people just live day to day and are in survival mode. I believe I have once read something that goes along the lines of “poorer demographics generally have tendency to make more children because they think that more children is the most sure way to secure their near future for when they get older”
I think it’s simpler than that. Nothing to do when you’re poor and overworked so you just fuck.
Declining birth rates are multi faceted and no-one has a complete explanation. They’re also declining in countries which are doing well, across all social strata but disproportionately along the wealthy, so your explanation is very clearly incomplete.
The existence of condoms and women wanting normal life. Also the cost, time and money involved in creating a competent person.
It’s the cost. By far the biggest reason. People that don’t want kids, don’t want kids.
But many people do, but it’s simply not financially reasonable.
Childcare, lack of days off and medical expenses are insane.
Part of it yeah, but the emancipation of women seems like a bigger factor, as women with less choices in poor families are more likely to have children despite the insane costs, and it isn’t out of malice or misunderstanding either. And other factors are the stress and the general pessimism people have for the future, especially regarding climate change.
also declining in countries which are doing well, across all social strata
So when someone says “fucked up world” you imagine not country destroying wars, fascist presidents at the top of biggest countries and threat of a looming world war but how well someone’s economic situation is? Interesting perspective.
Also I don’t think anything I have said provides a simple explanation for declining birth rates. It simply suggests an ordering between AI chatbots and fucked up world as causes of declining birth rates. So your comment doesn’t really apply.
Can you find the wars and election of Trump (for the first time) on these charts? Or anything to back up the view expressed in the original comment?
Can you find any actual analysis which supports the view that the current drop in fertility is generally caused by sentiment about life? No? You’re just going to lob useless comments like “Interesting perspective”? OK.
Can you find any actual analysis
Their analysis appears to be “because of the feels”.
Have you read their latest comment?
Which?
I meant this one https://piefed.social/post/2230173/comment/12224050
it the current drop in fertility is generally caused by sentiment about life
Do you understand what an ordering is or what it means when someone says
drop in fertility has more to do with sentiment about life than AI chatbots
Does it mean sentiment about life is the only explanation? No
Does it mean sentiment about life is the major explanation? No
It does require to show that sentiment about life does in fact effect fertility rates and here they are:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8924345/
Yea yea we get it you are so great at thinking outside the box and every other comment made is just ideological populist shit. Grow up and learn to discuss stuff with people.
Amazing, you came up with something worthwhile, though not before you were a snippy little bellend. I’ll still read it though.
Here’s why I read your “ordering” in your original comment (I didn’t see your mention of ordering in your second comment, as that was an edit) as ascribing the majority of the effect to sentiment about life: because you (still) didn’t provide any evidence for that claim, the only way it made sense to me was if what you were actually saying was that sentiment about life was such a major and significant contributor to falling birth rates that we could simply assume it was more important than AI chatbots.
By the way, I find it very interesting that the two studies you were both largely about economic circumstances (4/6 axes in the first study, the entire premise in the second).
Yea yea we get it you are so great at thinking outside the box and every other comment made is just ideological populist shit. Grow up and learn to discuss stuff with people.
Interesting perspective you have there.
snippy little bellend
so your explanation is very clearly incomplete.
You’re just going to lob useless comments like “Interesting perspective”? OK.
Amazing, you came up with something worthwhile
Are you practicing accusations in the mirror technique, I don’t understand. Do you really not realize how aggravating your discussion approach is? Do you really expect someone to see your first comment and go “oh what a lovely reply, let me get into a very interesting discussion with this person”? Are you really that not self-aware?
Your prior entry point to the discussion was claiming that I was somehow trying to prove that sentiment about life is the one and only explanation of declining birthrates. Now that you have admitted that you were wrong in assuming that (I assume you did otherwise there is no point in discussing further because we are discussing something fictitious), lets go back to the crux of the discussion:
I am claiming sentiment about life is a more major contributer to declining birth rates than AI chat bots. And you are asking for proof or evidence of this? If you only accept as valid proof a carefully designed study that compares AI chat bots and sentiment about life for this particular question, I would only laugh at this expectation (mostly because AI chatbot romantic relations are relatively new and this is an original claim about them effecting birth rates so very unlikely for some researcher to have taken up on it yet).
Currently, the only reasonable way one can compare the two is to see if there are any sources that independently claim they are contributers to declining birth rates (or not). I have presented multiple source for the first one (and have read more in the past). For the latter I don’t think we will find any sources, but it is biased by the fact that it is a relatively new concept and people may not have studied it. In such a scenario the only reasonable action then is to default to logic and that is what I did. From my previous readings and my own perspective I think sentiment about life affects birth rates. From reasoning I imagine people get into serious relations with AI chatbots because they want to lead a life in isolation from Earth, they have stuff they feel like are missing from their life (hope for future etc) and they look for comfort in a chatbot that always confirms what you say, bigs you up no matter and presents minimal friction. So for me it makes more sense to view it a side-effect of again sentiment of life rather than an individual causative effect on declining birth rates. If true, this would mean because both declining birth rates and increase in chatbot romantic relations are caused by decreasing sentiment in life they may indeed be correlated but do not cause each other. And hence makes sense why someone who hasn’t thought about it deeply may think it is causative.
You have not contributed one bit to this discussion apart from aggravating the OP (me) and pulling the discussion in completely the wrong direction while trying to present an aura of the superior unbiased debater. lol.
Do you really not realize how aggravating your discussion approach is?
When people respond with that kind of passive-aggressive sniping, I don’t see any reason to have any other kind of approach.
[It’s too early for there to be evidence about AI chatbots’ effects on birth rates]
Yeah, I agree.
I think I’ve said all I wanted to say, don’t have anything to say regarding your speculation on the other factors and, since your reply was sensible (and not snippy) don’t have any motivation to be annoying either.
Hypocrit
Are they also going to go back in time to stop people aborting girl foetuses so there aren’t more men than women?
I love how they think these losers would be getting laid if it wasn’t for the chatbot.
Hey don’t lump us losers with those cogsuckers.
“Cogsuckers”!! Thanks for expanding my vocabulary!
So China got their overpopulation under control in order for it to make sense to worry about declining birth rates?
The prospects for China are not looking particularly good. Decades of a one-child policy seems to have helped normalize one child per couple.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate
China has a fertility rate of 1.02 children per woman.
For comparison, in the US that rate is 1.62 children per woman and in Germany 1.46.A “healthy” fertility rate, where the population remains more or less stable (not accounting for immigration), is roughly at 2.1 children per woman.
The West is going to have issues with their low birthrates, but the looming Chinese demographics crisis is looking to be much worse than what the West is going to be dealing with.
I swear the next global superpower will be determined by whatever country has the least problems.
The chatbots in question developed where, again?
