I need help with 1 question You are working for the NSA and they have decided that they want to keep records on every human being on the planet who is now alive or will be in the next 100 years. If the NSA wants to use the smallest amount of data possible, and that data can cross bytes, how much storage should you plan for? Assumptions: World population is 7.5 billion It is projected that 15 billion people will be born in the next 100 years The NSA wants to maintain 10,000 data points per person Each data point can have a maximum of 50 possible values The NSA wants to allow for a possible 50% expansion of data points and possible values. They also want to allow for the possibility that the up to 50% more people than anticipated will be born in the next 100 years. Solution the UN reports that their estimate of World population has 1-2% error. An evaluation of a series of United Nations population projections between the 1950s and 1990s found that all but one had a margin of error of less than 4%. Most factors indicate an undercount. World population could be 7.4 billion or even 7.5 billion now. High population growth in Nigeria and other African countries but they have the oldest and most inaccurate Census * China hiding many second and third children * Various scientific studies show that assumed decreased fertility in Africa is not happening or happening more slowly which means a lot more children, so a census with missing people from ten years ago assumes smaller families but there were more Countries like Eritrea, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo did not conduct population censuses between 2005 and 2014, as required by the UN for their 2010 round of projections. This year Angola conducted its first national census in 30 years, Dr Mady Biaye, Technical Advisor for East and Southern Africa at the United Nations Population Fund told Africa Check. Nigeria for example has far less accurate population recording systems. Other countries have not held censuses for decades. In Nigeria the country’s census figures have been the subject of controversy for decades. Accusations of rigging date back to the 1950s and have continued unabated under military and civilian regimes. These numbers, along with most of what we think of as facts in development, are actually estimates. We have actual numbers on maternal mortality for just 16% of all births, and on malaria for about 15% of all deaths. For six countries in Africa, there is basically no information at all. The world of development has had an odd double-think about data for decades now. On the one hand, researchers and others will freely admit to the huge gaps and problems with development data (indeed, it\'s sometimes hard to get people to stop talking about it). But on the other hand, these same individuals and institutions have quite big vested interests in downplaying the unreliability of data. An academic who has just carried out a complex piece of econometrics based on househo.

1. I need help with 1 question
You are working for the NSA and they have decided that they want to keep records on every
human being on the planet who is now alive or will be in the next 100 years. If the NSA wants to
use the smallest amount of data possible, and that data can cross bytes, how much storage should
you plan for? Assumptions:
World population is 7.5 billion
It is projected that 15 billion people will be born in the next 100 years
The NSA wants to maintain 10,000 data points per person
Each data point can have a maximum of 50 possible values
The NSA wants to allow for a possible 50% expansion of data points and possible values. They
also want to allow for the possibility that the up to 50% more people than anticipated will be
born in the next 100 years.
Solution
the UN reports that their estimate of World population has 1-2% error. An evaluation of a series
of United Nations population projections between the 1950s and 1990s found that all but one had
a margin of error of less than 4%. Most factors indicate an undercount. World population could
be 7.4 billion or even 7.5 billion now.
High population growth in Nigeria and other African countries but they have the oldest and most
inaccurate Census
* China hiding many second and third children
* Various scientific studies show that assumed decreased fertility in Africa is not happening or
happening more slowly which means a lot more children, so a census with missing people from
ten years ago assumes smaller families but there were more
Countries like Eritrea, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo did not conduct
population censuses between 2005 and 2014, as required by the UN for their 2010 round of
projections. This year Angola conducted its first national census in 30 years, Dr Mady Biaye,
Technical Advisor for East and Southern Africa at the United Nations Population Fund told
Africa Check. Nigeria for example has far less accurate population recording systems. Other
countries have not held censuses for decades.
In Nigeria the country’s census figures have been the subject of controversy for decades.
Accusations of rigging date back to the 1950s and have continued unabated under military and
civilian regimes.

2. These numbers, along with most of what we think of as facts in development, are actually
estimates. We have actual numbers on maternal mortality for just 16% of all births, and on
malaria for about 15% of all deaths. For six countries in Africa, there is basically no information
at all.
The world of development has had an odd double-think about data for decades now. On the one
hand, researchers and others will freely admit to the huge gaps and problems with development
data (indeed, it's sometimes hard to get people to stop talking about it). But on the other hand,
these same individuals and institutions have quite big vested interests in downplaying the
unreliability of data.
An academic who has just carried out a complex piece of econometrics based on household
survey data doesn't want to be told the data is so poor that the results are pretty meaningless. An
aid agency that finds malaria rates have come down in a country where there is a big malaria
programme doesn't want the party spoiled by people pointing out that these are unreliable
estimates.
That might be one of the reasons why improving data has never been a big priority for the
international development effort, or for national governments (with some notable exceptions).
Donors aren't funding it – the share of official aid allocated to statistical development halved
between 2011-12, to a vanishingly small 0.16% of all aid.