For most people it's supposedly something like 10^2.5 or ~300 people in your monkey sphere of varying levels of importance. So, in an exponential sort of way its decent rounding :P
And the maximal delta between all 7 billion humans and the minimal version of many, let's say 3, makes such a statement unhelpfully limited in scope, while implying a controversy of thin air
> There are only 6.6 billion people in the world, so you only need 33 bits (more precisely, 32.6 bits) of information about a person to determine who they are.
I think you should count the dead as well. But then, 33 bits ~= 8 billion, which should still be enough, I guess.
27 out of a million, or 1 out of 37000. For some reason using "whole people" in statistics makes it seem a little more real to me, 2.7 of 100k seems too dry and remote.
Not that I am a mathematician, but I am pretty sure that you can't actually calculate how many 40+ people there are just from these values since you can't assume the distribution is normal.
I found the absurd over-precision more problematic. There probably were exactly that many people in the USA at some instant in time in this century. For a minute or two at most. 310 million is a more sensible way to report the population.
reply