[HN Gopher] Population much more than 8.2B, rural areas underest...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Population much more than 8.2B, rural areas underestimated
        
       Author : the__prestige
       Score  : 54 points
       Date   : 2025-03-21 19:19 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.popularmechanics.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.popularmechanics.com)
        
       | lenerdenator wrote:
       | Well, is it a few million, or a billion?
       | 
       | It doesn't really say in the article.
        
         | wongarsu wrote:
         | _If_ the paper is accurate and not falling prey to false
         | assumptions or some other error we are talking about billions.
         | If we just generalize the deviations claimed by the paper out
         | to the entire world there are about another 3-5 billion humans.
         | If the paper is accurate but doesn 't generalize to other
         | countries we are still talking about a billion people.
        
         | johnea wrote:
         | I had the same question.
         | 
         | I thought reading the paper in Nature would give some more
         | insight, but no.
         | 
         | I was looking for at least an estimate of what they thought
         | world population should be, but that doesn't seem to be
         | included in any of the text...
        
       | teaearlgraycold wrote:
       | The article doesn't really give much scientific information. But
       | wouldn't areas flooded by dams be much higher in population than
       | other areas? They would be by rivers and within valleys.
       | Protected land with a fresh water supply. What relative
       | population increase did they assume for these regions?
        
       | jdietrich wrote:
       | _> "When dams are built, large areas are flooded and people need
       | to be relocated," Lang-Ritter said in a press statement. "The
       | relocated population is usually counted precisely because dam
       | companies pay compensation to those affected."_
       | 
       | Sure, "we've been systematically undercounting population for
       | decades" is a more plausible explanation than "large
       | infrastructure projects in rural areas of underdeveloped
       | countries are a bonanza of corruption".
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | Concerningly, they acknowledge accuracy of the numbers reported
         | by the dam projects under limitations... by only highlighting
         | the opposite, that it could be under-reported by them. I feel
         | like I'm missing a lot for this to have been published but I'd
         | expect such a paper about limitations of existing studies to be
         | especially heavy on what the limitations of this new method
         | might be.
         | 
         | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-56906-7#:~:text=L...
        
           | MichaelZuo wrote:
           | I've actually looked into this for a few developing
           | countries, and dam resettlement figures are very likely to be
           | inflated.
           | 
           | There's no actual combination of outsiders going around to
           | every household in every village for even a dozen days of the
           | year to plausibly provide a third party confirmation of
           | claimed residence for each individual.
           | 
           | It's effectively villagers certifying each other that they
           | really live there as a primary residence.
        
             | lurk2 wrote:
             | One of the more frightening things I ever learned was that
             | if the population of China began walking in front of you at
             | a rate of 1 person per second, it would take approximately
             | 31 years for the entire population to pass you.
             | 
             | The math, roughly:
             | 
             | 1 billion people (there are more now, but we'll call it an
             | even billion) / 60 seconds [?] 16,666,666 minutes
             | 
             | 16,666,666 / 60 minutes in an hour [?] 277,777 hours
             | 
             | 277,777 hours / 24 hours in a day [?] 11,574 days
             | 
             | 11,574 / 365 days in a year [?] 31 years.
             | 
             | That's just China. The global population would take around
             | 220 years, with not so much time as to say hello. A
             | bureaucracy can of course delegate census reporting such
             | that the groups become manageable, but it puts a lot of
             | things into perspective when you understand the sheer scale
             | of the human population.
        
               | VincentEvans wrote:
               | Using your own contrived math - if you have just 30
               | helpers - you can count population of China in 1 year. Or
               | with 219 helpers you can do the same for world
               | population.
               | 
               | In US, for the 2020 decennial census, the U.S. Census
               | Bureau hired approximately 500,000 temporary workers
               | across the country to assist with the count.
        
             | more-nitor wrote:
             | > It's effectively villagers certifying each other that
             | they really live there as a primary residence.
             | 
             | this. some smart asses would be calling all their
             | relatives, distant-relatives, friends, etc AND claim that
             | they all lived there.
             | 
             | the more better approach would be compensating by property,
             | though does have its own downsides
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | Are you saying that large infrastructure projects have been
         | systematically overcounting population in order to pay more
         | compensation? That there's an interest in making them seem
         | _more_ disruptive, and as if they displace _more_ people?
         | 
         | If that's an obvious conclusion, I need more explanation.
        
           | allturtles wrote:
           | The issue is that the availability of money gives people an
           | incentive _to be counted_ , even if they don't live there.
        
           | kmeisthax wrote:
           | No, it's the people being resettled who have an incentive to
           | overcount themselves.
        
           | solid_fuel wrote:
           | It doesn't need to be top-down corruption on the part of Dam
           | Corp, LLC.
           | 
           | Think about it this way - you and your family live somewhere
           | and are being displaced to make way for a dam, some guy in a
           | suit comes around and says "we'll pay $1000 per resident to
           | move you somewhere else".
           | 
           | Maybe your uncle lived at your house with his wife for 5
           | years, until they moved to the city last year. Your
           | grandmother lived there until she died 6 months ago. So lets
           | say it's just you, your partner, and 2 kids.
           | 
           | But, that's a lot of money - do you tell the man in the suit
           | that your house has 4 residents, or maybe stretch the truth
           | to 5 or 6 (your uncle might move back soon, after all)?
           | 
           | And remember, corruption often stacks - individuals might add
           | an extra person here and there, but then the local relocation
           | manager adds a few % to get a little extra on top, and their
           | boss adds another few %, and so on... soon you're seeing 25%
           | more people than actually reside there.
        
             | Muromec wrote:
             | Chekhov, "Dead souls". The scam can go both ways, you need
             | to be local to know how it works and not benefit from it
             | enough to snitch.
        
           | 00N8 wrote:
           | No, I think the conjecture is more that people from the
           | surrounding areas could be claiming residency in the affected
           | area to receive the payouts, even though they normally live
           | elsewhere.
        
             | Muromec wrote:
             | Likely the manager who makes the payouts happen and not
             | people themselves
        
         | kristjansson wrote:
         | A dollar per dead snake, you say?
        
           | lurk2 wrote:
           | I saw this happen on a Minecraft server. It was an economy
           | simulator based out of Sweden or Denmark. The administrator
           | was committed to Keynesian economics. One day he wants to
           | clear a desert to build a new town. To compensate people for
           | working there, he used a plug-in called Shop Chests, allowing
           | users who deposited 64 sand into the chest to receive 100
           | units of the server's currency. This was substantially more
           | than the sand was worth on the open market. Since this guy
           | was a Keynesian, he had also built a government marketplace
           | that bought and sold all the major blocks. Rather than
           | spending the afternoon digging, I warped to the market,
           | bought out the entire supply of sand, warped back to the job
           | site, and sold the sand at the higher price.
           | 
           | This kind of thing happened a lot with absentee owners who
           | would set prices for their shops lower or higher than the
           | market price. If the owner had set up hoppers underneath the
           | shop chest, you could effectively bankrupt him overnight. It
           | happened a lot with minecarts, diamonds, colored wool, and
           | things like that.
        
       | wongarsu wrote:
       | The original paper is discussed here:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43398308
        
       | rendang wrote:
       | I've typically heard it rumored that populations get
       | overestimated, as corrupt local officials in developing countries
       | want to get more resources/power allocated to their district
        
         | TwoPhonesOneKid wrote:
         | That seems like the kind of behavior that would drastically
         | vary from place to place and culture to culture. Just compare
         | Rwanda with the DRC, for instance--neighboring countries with
         | nearly polar-opposite reputation of how corruption is
         | expressed. The DRC's corruption (aka Tshisekedi) means very low
         | centralized control and an incredibly brutal multi-front civil
         | war. Kagame's style has led to one of the most authoritarian
         | countries on earth, albeit one with very low crime rates. That
         | these are bordering countries with overlapping cultures and
         | peoples and these places produce such wildly different
         | expression of societies (as of today, that is) is quite
         | illustrative.
         | 
         | There are certainly some ways that the behavior of countries
         | can be painted with a wide brush, but each country still has
         | unique dysfunctions and strengths. It's very difficult to say
         | anything broadly applicable that doesn't have glaring
         | exceptions undercutting the premise.
         | 
         | This is especially, especially true in places with great
         | restrictions on freedom of the press--Rwanda's image is almost
         | certainly partially fabricated, but it's very difficult to
         | interpret the state of affairs from outside the country.
         | 
         | Corruption is certainly a constant across all countries, but
         | the form the corruption takes is very dynamic.
        
       | insane_dreamer wrote:
       | Doesn't every country or at least major country conduct censuses?
       | Assuming there are some countries that can't or don't due to
       | conflict, lack of resources etc. it seems these would be limited
       | and therefore whatever estimates are made for those countries
       | would be off my millions but certainly not billions.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | No. Some countries don't need "census" as every citizen is
         | sufficiently tracked and must report their official address.
         | And so would most migrants. Meaning that with modern computer
         | databases you can track births, deaths, immigration and
         | emigration down to single person.
        
       | Newlaptop wrote:
       | Frustratingly problematic headline, I'd expect better from
       | Popular Mechanics.
       | 
       | The title "Oops, Scientists May Have Severely Miscalculated How
       | Many Humans Are on Earth" is entirely misleading- it's not
       | "scientists" who have miscalculated this, it's government
       | bureaucrats in various countries who are responsible for
       | collecting and reporting census information in their region.
       | 
       | This matters, because we live in a world where many people get
       | much of their information only from headlines, and a recurring
       | narrative of "Scientists make mistakes" or "Scientists can't be
       | trusted" has real impact to policy on climate change, vaccine
       | hesitancy, and other areas where distrust of scientific knowledge
       | or expertise causes uninformed people to make decisions harmful
       | to their own well-being or harmful to those around them on
       | everything from nutrition to pollution to evacuations before
       | hurricanes.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-21 23:01 UTC)