My default assumption is that what I said before didn't change anything and doesn't matter, so I'm always a little interested in finding new things to do or say. I was going to go to sleep but the expectation of being bored in 10 hours made me think about things.
If the US government is, in fact, doing things like talking to people whose existence I somehow benefit from online. For example suppose that I tried to share this proposal with everyone I possibly could online, through YouTube comment forms and direct messages and so on. Although I have gotten temporarily treated as a spammer by YouTube, that was possibly because I was saying the same thing. I think it once happened when I was thinking about contacting someone after watching a song about climate change, but generally I could probably avoid getting 'shadow-banned' by YouTube.
If I did this, maybe people would stop doing stuff but not actually reply to me concerning this proposal. Note how Robert Reich avoided going online for almost a month soon after I contacted him about this proposal. Then maybe I would be bored if I couldn't see new videos or whatever. So if the US government thinks that I 'should' be sharing this proposal with everyone, then if I don't then I'm 'bad', and if the US government does share it when doing so might be effective, there will be the same result as if I hadn't been 'bad'. If people don't publicly share it, then the US government can convince itself that I'm not actually being bad by not sharing it, since doing so would have no positive effect. Then maybe it can decide that there is no need to illegally kidnap and torture me or some other thing as a result of me being 'bad'.
So, suppose the US government is sometimes doing things like this. Does this mean that the US is awesome, and the best country in the world as well as the smartest? People might think so because understanding my thought processes is hard or something. But people who think this are stupid, it's like the 'headology' described in the Discworld series. The average person can't track my online movements, and couldn't convince an ISP to give them information about what I do; but if the US government can do so, it's not because of great ability in the government employees doing the asking, it's just because they're wearing the 'hat' of government authority.
But this was the less important thing and what was the other
It had to do with what I referenced in the last post; if information is hidden, is the result the same? In that case, the hidden information is whether people read my emails and cared about them.
I was trying to write something that would be useful to other people, but I did have a specific situation in mind.
There were many unknowns, which are mostly still unknown though some might have changed, and several possible outcomes. One outcome was, as it always is, that someone could randomly die, including me.
It's a fact that some relationships end because one of the people in it is unable to have children. Even if physical appearance doesn't matter, and personal traits like clumsiness or lack of competence in some specific area aren't an issue, there is still sometimes this.
As long as humans are affected by the competence of other humans, then genetic variation means that some people will care about what type of humans will exist in the future.
I have tried to avoid any negative results from information being obscured that I could have revealed.
