That was just a bit too much for me. Bionic people would still be using condoms - that is just common sense.
Also, will women still be getting pregnant in vivo? Because if so, then 'because bioengineering' wouldn't be sufficient protection from the hollow mutant zombie babies that would be produced (as a side effect of all the _bioengineering_)
I've seen quite a few career women hire surrogate mothers. E.g. their eggs, the guy's sperm, but a different mother. That's certainly something that's only possible due to medical technology. Similarly, the pill was a huge revolution and there are trials for reversible male contraception as well. If all STDs are curable and everyone controls their fertility by better means, why would you bother with a condom that removes the sense of touch for one of the parties?
depends on how representative the sample is? But yeah, a few thousand _might_ be good enough if you are able to pick sufficiently randomly - but still from each representative class!
Yes of course, but it's a bit unfair to dismiss a survey you have not read on the basis of it being 'only' over 9000 people out of 120M, when that same amount in a properly set up investigation would be more than enough to make significant claims about a population of 300M.
We can of course theorize about whether or not all classes where properly represented, and of course we can't immediately regard the results as absolute truth, but the fact is that this was a serious survey and should be treated as such until review has shown otherwise.
So Techcrunch references the quote below from the Guardian.
"Look to Japan to see the start of this growing trend: over 25 percent of young men and 45 percent of young woman say they are no longer interested in sex."
The Guardian makes this quote;
"The number of single people has reached a record high. A survey in 2011 found that 61% of unmarried men and 49% of women aged 18-34 were not in any kind of romantic relationship, a rise of almost 10% from five years earlier"
and references the formal study that is linked in the top comment and the one I also linked.
But this quote that Techcrunch took from the Guardian;
" A survey earlier this year by the Japan Family Planning Association (JFPA) found that 45% of women aged 16-24 "were not interested in or despised sexual contact". More than a quarter of men felt the same way."
... is linked to another study. Well they don't actually link to the study, just to the homepage of the people who did.
Which has in the website title, "Every Child a Wanted Child", which isn't quite likely to be as unbiased as the official census linked above.
Now I'm trying to track down the actual study which hasn't been referenced by either Techcrunch or The Guardian which has the major quote they are selling their articles with.
Edit: Huffington Post ran a similar article with the same reference, they linked to this article as the source
"In other words, the Internet was agog over a report that 22 males and 38 females aged 16-19 said either that they had no interest in sex or despised it. When the Huffington Post spun this story as “a third of the nation’s youth” disliking sex, they were basing it on the response of 60 self-selected people."
Haha, very nice work! So let me get this straight. They selected only 3000 people from 16-49 (not 9000), then of those, they managed to find the addresses of only 2693 to give them the survey, and then only 1540 actually did the survey. Of those 1540 just 126 were between ages 16 and 19, and from those slightly under half, so 60 people, said the thing that was quoted.
My housemates were just talking about this Japanese issue yesterday and coming up with all sorts of conclusions and hypotheses as to why this cultural phenomenon might occur, when actually there is no hard evidence that it exists!
seemingly the program is also run backwards. so maybe it will try coins with various biases until it determines the model that gives the fair flipping?
i am speaking from what i gathered reading the article and the other comments. seems pretty interesting to me.
reply