Whoa. People born around this time will (hopefully) live to the year 2100.
mind be blown.
this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2025
684 points (96.0% liked)
Microblog Memes
6129 readers
3410 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
In 2100 I will be 126 so I hope not. Not unless they have massively improved geriatric medicine.
But imagine a worst reality, what if they do invent immortality drugs, and then we're stuck with these idiots forever? What if it's just century after century of the flat Earth conspiracy theorists (despite us clearly having a moon colony) and Andrew Tate.
Your take is not the correct one, longevity treatments (immortality drugs isn't something that can be made) will roll back your physical age by reparing you. Not just forcing life to stay in a decaying body.
So at 126 you'll run around playing basketball and listening to heavy metal, if that's what you like.
Well you can give me a new heart but unless they do something about the brain there isn't any point.
The brain is "just" cells too, they regenerate and so forth. No specific problem keeping it in a young state.
I'm 36 and it's not impossible that I'd see the year 2100 so yeah.
I feel this negative outlook isn't very healthy. Yes there are problems, as there have been at any point in history. That doesn't mean nothing good happens or can happen.
Go make some nice things happen to yourself or someone else.
yes. a lot.
My dude, only 24 years have elapsed in this century https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_century, the 25th year has only just started. Try again next year.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Extreme poverty worldwide is down from 38% to 8.5% since 2000. Global median income has doubled in that period. And yes, that's adjusted for inflation.
Oh, and renewable energy generation as share of the global energy mix has consistently beaten expectations during that period, too. Solar, specifically.
Bullshit. Global inequality is on a constant rise. The extreme poverty crap is propaganda by the world bank who lowered the poverty line for no other reason than to make capitalism look good.
That stuff about renewaple energy is simple greenwashing. The only year since 2000 when CO2 emissions went down was in 2020 thanks to COVID.
Doesn't look that way to me, given that the change has been pretty smooth and shows up on specific regions and adjusting for outliers and inflation (and matches the rise in median income).
More importantly, it's not incompatible with global inequality on the rise. Different stats measure different things.
Renewable energy beating expectations is the opposite of greenwashing, it specifically compares actual generated renewable energy against previous projections. If you want to poke holes into it for the sake of... denying anything good has ever happened, I guess? you should instead point out at how disproportionately that growth is driven by China.
And again, that's perfectly compatible with CO2 emissions going up. Different stats, different things.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
I don't know too much about the median income, but I'd wager that it was mostly because the really poor country got a bit better off. Also, at least according to Wikipedia, the latest definition of extreme poverty was made in 2015, before the recent inflation spikes.
And "beat expectations" is just a non-statement. What were the expectations? And how does it matter if we're still on track for a climate catastrophe? We've crossed the 1.5°C target.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(13 replies)
Lord of the Rings (movies) came out this century. Let's give credit where credit is due.
load more comments
(2 replies)
It feels to me like it all went to shit when Bush stole the election from Gore - using the Supreme Court I might add.
I'm 37 this year and I remember being a kid at a time when we were all more optimistic and well off. When a middle class existed in the west. When we were told the world was our oyster and we just had to study and work hard to get anything we wanted. That piece of advice was valid to a handful of us millenials, diminishing to those born in the 1990s. My husband is 31 and has never been on an overseas holiday - the differences in privilege just being born 6 years later are stark and upsetting. It's only gotten worse for younger generations and the people who did all this are cackling as they push their boots in harder on our throats.
As a pacifist I just don't know what to do anymore other than try to live my life among the damned and hope it resolves itself before something comes for me and mine.
Born 1980 remember all the privilege we had before that day. Hell at 19 I lived on my own in one bedroom apartment. I remember working at Walmart in my 20's and still afford to have an apartment of my own. Started to go down hill in 2006. Before then I never needed roommates or someone else help pay bills.
Even at 22 making 6.25 an hour and had a studio apartment. You couldn't do that now on 12 an hour. Not without living in a getto.
load more comments
(2 replies)
The first quarter of this century is over at the end of 2025.
2001 was the first year in this century. 2025 is the 25th year in this century. 2100 will be the 100th - and last - year in this century.
(1 was the first year in the first century, 100 was the 100th - and last - year in the first century. That's why every subsequent century starts on xx1 or xxx1 as well)
load more comments
(31 replies)
No? It's not 2026 yet
~~Is the year 2020 part of this century?~~
Edit: am dumb
Yes but 2000 was not.
Sorry, I meant 2000, and thinking about it, yes I guess that's correct
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›