Facelikeapotato@lemmy.ml to WholeSomeMemes@lemmy.ml · 2 years agoHello!lemmy.mlimagemessage-square37fedilinkarrow-up1667arrow-down110cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1657arrow-down1imageHello!lemmy.mlFacelikeapotato@lemmy.ml to WholeSomeMemes@lemmy.ml · 2 years agomessage-square37fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squarerandomsnark@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·2 years 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-up1·2 years 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?).