/** * file: karbytes_02_january_2024.txt * type: plain-text * date: 02_JANUARY_2024 * author: karbytes * license: PUBLIC_DOMAIN */ Today I called the Patelco Credit Union member support call center again about my missing paycheck from Amazon (which was supposed to be deposited into my Patelco checking account on 29_DECEMBER_2023) and the agent on the phone said that Patelco has no record of that paycheck ever being sent to Patelco even though Amazon employee support agents (last year) said that the paycheck was sent to that bank account. Today I also talked to another Amazon employee support agent (after I talked to a Patelco agent) about that missing paycheck and was told by that Amazon employee support agent that the paycheck was sent to my bank account and that the check was rejected and that my direct deposit information was no longer on file with Amazon and that the paycheck I was supposed to receive via direct deposit on 29_DECEMBER_2023 is being mailed to my home address as a paper check. (I asked the Amazon employee support agent if my future paychecks from Amazon would be delivered to my home address as paper checks and the person said that I would continue to recieve all of my future paychecks from Amazon as paper checks delivered to my legal residence unless I update my pay information with a new direct deposit bank account). I do not remember removing my bank information from the direct deposit section of my Amazon A to Z account and I think someone else did or that it happened automatically (possibly as a result of suspected theft of my "Any Time Pay" Wisely card possibly being issued to someone other than me without my knowledge and that person attempting to steal my money because I saw that the Wisely card which was previously available for me to have delivered to my house is now no longer available (and I do not plan on ever ordering a "new" one because I think it would significantly increase the likelihood that my money will get stolen or put on hold)). * * * The lines of text below this line of text in this plain-text file were added to this note before the lines of text above this line were added to this note. * * * The following six lines of text were copied from a private plain-text journal entry which was written by karbytes on 01_JANUARY_2024 and saved inside of a private karbytes-created GitHub repository named karbytes_basement_2: Are there currently enough material resources available on Planet Earth to sustain human civilization for the next two hundred years? Are there currently enough material resources available on Planet Earth to enable each human individual which is currently alive (whether that human individual is a zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, child, adolescent, young adult, not so young adult, law abiding citizen, or not so law abiding citizen) to survive for at least fifty years and in conditions which are deemed by international ethics committees to be adequately safe, comfortable, and enjoyable? I feel compelled to inform the general public that I feel obliged to and likely will sacrifice my own safety, comfort, and enjoyment so that other people can have more of such things. I understand atoms are arranged in a particular configuration throughout my universe which causes matter to behave according to predictable "rules" and that among those rules is evolutionary pressure which causes only some of rather than all of some population of some type of species of organism to survive past a certain length of time and/or to pass on their genes by sexually or asexually reproducing while each of the other members of that population dies at a younger age and/or without ever sexually or else asexually reproducing. I have always felt disinterested in personally becoming a parent and cannot imagine seriously being happy as one. I have also been very forthcoming to the public about that sentiment (and "resulting" intention I have for me to remain single, childless, and as autonomous and solitary as possible (within reason)). I understand that "the most important" beings in all existence (according to humans in general) are those who are members of a household with minor (especially prepubescent (especially preverbal)) children in it (which means that, by implication, every other creature on Planet Earth is morally and perhaps legally obliged to sacrifice their safety, comfort, and enjoyment in order to benefit those deemed to be "the most important" beings in all existence by humans in general (or perhaps just by those with sufficient power to control access to material resources and to inflict violence, torture, vandalism, theft, or censorship such that every other member of the civilization is unable to have nearly as much ability to partake in such coercive activities (and I sometimes colloquially refer to such superior coercive ability as the rule that "might makes right" (and "might makes right" means "whoever has the most adaptability to adverse circumstances tends to be the individual(s) who decide what its population's cultural and economic activities are))). * * * To sum up what I said in the last paragraph in the previous section of this note, I would say that the members of a society who have the most control over their own lives are those who are given the most advantages the soonest and/or for the most amount of time. What I mean to imply is that such "power" accumulates exponentially (which is why lopsided (political) "power" distribution exists and seems to be commonplace throughout human civilization's evolutionary history). * * * To elaborate on what I said during the previous two paragraphs, I would like to add the following commentary (and the following line of text might actually be the most important (to karbytes) part of this plain-text note file): When I said that I would offer to lose some of my safety, comfort, and enjoyment so that people other than myself can have more safety, comfort, and enjoyment than they presumably would have otherwise, I did not say that because I prefer to make people other than myself happy more than I prefer to make myself happy. Instead, I said that I would voluntarily undergo such a sacrifice in order to avoid suffering through experiences which I think would essentially strip my life of a sense of it being worth my effort to continue living through. In other words, I would rather appease those who I fear might get away with inflicing suffering on me beyond what I have patience for. I am not really a masochist and do not want to become one just to survive a relatively joyless and agony-filled life. Instead, I would most likely attempt to, as cleanly and as painlessly as possible (for myself and for all other humans), end my life (most likely by jumping off of a sufficiently tall cliff in an area I think is not likely to be populated with humans so that, when my body hits the ground, I do not accidentally land on top of other people). * * * I would like to suggest that every human being has the potential to live for an indefinitely long time (i.e. to remain alive for as long as material resources for sustaining that life are available and used for that purpose). I would like to suggest that as many human beings as possible refrain from making new humans unless those humans (a) feel strongly compelled by their own intrinsic desire to create and to raise their own children and (b) can provide the basic necessities which those children should always have according to international ethics committees. I would like to suggest that, if the rate at which humans are dying within a particular period of time exceeds the rate at which new humans are being born during that same time period, no human should be forced against its will to become a parent (and what should be done instead is allow the species to go extinct or else remain at a relatively low population density as a result of the death rate outpacing the birth rate for a sufficiently long time (or if the death rate and the birth rate for that population both effectively drop down to zero and remain at approximately zero)). Finally, I would like to suggest that humans stop harvesting meat (and other products which are obtained in ways which international ethics committees deem to be unnecessarily cruel) from whole live organisms such as fish, chicken, and cows, and, instead, cultivate meat from stem cells which are harvested from animals without injuring, torturing, or killing those animals (i.e. in ways which international ethics committees deem to be ethical rather than unethical).