Facelikeapotato@lemmy.ml to WholeSomeMemes@lemmy.ml · 1 year agoHello!lemmy.mlimagemessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up1707arrow-down111
arrow-up1696arrow-down1imageHello!lemmy.mlFacelikeapotato@lemmy.ml to WholeSomeMemes@lemmy.ml · 1 year agomessage-square38fedilink
minus-squarerandomsnark@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoI believe you’re thinking of Dunbar’s Number, but it’s 150 rather than 300. Which does fit better with your original claim.
minus-square768@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoYo that’s the one. Quick skew on wikipedia and I wonder how reliable it is though, given the confidence intervals and broad scope (apes?).
I believe you’re thinking of Dunbar’s Number, but it’s 150 rather than 300. Which does fit better with your original claim.
Yo that’s the one. Quick skew on wikipedia and I wonder how reliable it is though, given the confidence intervals and broad scope (apes?).