we need global encouragement for people to not have more than 2 children. I nice slow draw down to 3 billion over many decades.

Well then, don't drive on public roads.

The internet of things will make my life better. It will make everyones life better.
The data will allow you to improve everything you do.

Its not the tech, it's the usage.

A) EMP impact on vehicles is highy over rated. In testing the worse case was some erroneous dash lights. Which went away after restarting the car.
B) When you're the only one on the road, you will be trivial to watch and find.
C) You should probably learn about cars.

You see those cameras on the freeway? yeah. Anyone you hang out with got a smart phone? Use plastic anywhere?

Instead of railing against the inevitable, spend that time and energy for protection on what, when, who, why, where and how it can be used?

I want a spy car, but that's probably not what you meant. :)

" (hint: public-key encryption)"
hint: won't work in any practical manner.

Except They are the Cavalry — according to their own page — are focusing on Cyber Safety, not privacy.

And our privacy — as far as cars are concerned anyway — has been shot for over a century already, when New York (always the Illiberal) mandated license plates in 1901.

They could not think, of course, that some day automatic license-plate readers will be archiving our driving histories. But the move — targeting "the rich", of course — was just as invasive even back then, as mandating that people carry identification at all times would be. And not just carry, but keep it visible from distance too...

Cars' new electronics may make it easier for the State to track us, but it has not been that hard before...

FEAR the technology! Its' gunna getcha! It might invade ten privacy you don't actually have on public roads!

" Your body absorbs until it has what it needs"
yes.. but what it has evolved to need, and what it actually needs in a modern society are no longer the same thing.
Not a lot of famine in the US, for example.

Why would you even want to do that?

Because I want more fellow human beings to exist. More artists, more scientists, more outright geniuses. Sure, more thieves too, but criminals affect the same share of population, whereas a single brilliant scientist may invent FTL travel or cure cancer for all...

But my wants are a moot point — the population will rise whether or not I (or you) want it, according to TFA.

What do you think filters out all of the crap we're putting into it?

Why do you hate humanity?

This individual and a Mr. Fusion, perhaps.

Mr. Fission — Mr. Fusion's older brother — would do just fine, thank you very much.

Not such a bright idea to plan on rearranging the world

I'm not planning on anything. I'm not even talking about rearranging the world — only the regions, Man may decide to populate when his technology allows.

The "rearranging" will not be any worse — nor seem any more "Star-Trekian" — than damming rivers or dredging waterways.

And you forgot all about 'ol Murphy.

He's always been with us, but we've grown in numbers anyway and are hardly starving today.

Yes but that food is already being grown

What the fook are you talking about? Israelis grow food in their own desert. The same methods can be used in Sahara and all other "hot" deserts — including the giant Sinai peninsula, which remains bare and barren since its return to Egypt.

It is possible and we know how to do it. We aren't doing it, but we can. And, should a compelling need arise, we will.

(and the water being overexploited)

There is no such thing.

I'm not sure that can be done cost effectively just yet.

It does not need to be done today. By 2100 we will be able to.

meanwhile, existing towns are running out of water.

Oh well, I guess these people can just move.

Though given that much of the non-populated near arctic is tundra on top of granite I am not sure how feasible that really is.

Is it really worse than Svalbard? People live there too. Longyearbyen may not be much today, but it is likely to expand, if more habitable areas elsewhere become too crowded.

But those places are mostly not suitable for growing crops.

False. Ample food can be grown in American Midwest as it is.

And the hot deserts can also be turned around very nicely. Earth can easily grow a lot more food than it does. It would be nice to waste less of it too...

And we can — with nuclear or fusion reactors...

Quantity of people is not a problem — not now, not in 2100. Quality, on the other hand, has always been a problem...