05-24-2016, 10:32 PM
Quote:My concern isn't over your knowledge or skill set, it's about processing. I know that you insist the subconscious mind can process a much larger and denser amount of data than the conscious mind can, and I know that consciously "beautiful women" can be equivalent to "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," but "women" is objectively simpler to understand (i.e. takes less energy and effort to process successfully) than "people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," takes less time to input which allows the space that would have been occupied by the longer statement to be instead occupied with other script, and there's less likelihood of the qualifiers after "people" being ignored or downplayed by a potentially lazy subconscious.
Objectively simpler for the conscious mind to understand, maybe. The subconscious has so much capability that it is completely irrelevant. In developing the 6G prototype, I have been forced on many occasions to use much more intricate descriptions than that in an effort to achieve a specific goal, and believe me, it works. Processing power is no problem at the level of complexity we are dealing with here. This is not going to be a monster script by any means. And as for how long it takes to input, with all the compression methods I have at my disposal now, that also becomes a complete non-issue. As for qualifiers being ignored or downplayed... or a "lazy subconscious"... I have to say that you're afraid of the dark on this one. Nothing gets ignored by the subconscious, and as far as I can see from more than 23 years of research, experimentation and study, it is not capable of laziness. Self sabotage? Maybe. But not laziness.
Quote:Also, with another processing analogy, "beautiful women" may result in one set of neural pathways firing to associate the prompt with the mind's recollection of beautiful women, while "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to" may take more time and/or effort to process because it may process in parts, drilling down like the more general "beautiful people" first then having to expend effort (however significant or insignificant) to filter to those "of the gender I am sexually attracted to," potentially processing that in parts like "of the gender I am" (which is male in this example) then having to process "sexually attracted to" and expend more effort linking the two clauses together to make the proper filter.
The difference you're talking about is the equivalent of a single find and replace operation, which for the subconscious is literally so quickly executed as to be instantaneous for all intents and purposes.
Quote:I'm not trying to belittle your efforts, Shannon, I'm simply looking to present an alternative argument for simpler, more overt and obvious wording based on the fact that it's not quite conclusive how the subconscious definitively and undisputedly processes data, though you without question seem to have come the closest of anyone I've encountered so far to finding out that answer. Also, I would think the trade off of writing a shorter script that would only need a Find & Replace All to change "women" to "men" would be more beneficial than writing a longer script that is gender neutral.
If after getting this far with the work I have done, I was not sure that this is the better way forward, would I have chosen it?
As for script length, that would not become an issue unless the script was over 100,000 words or so. It won't be. With the compression methods now at my disposal, I can actually achieve compression rates of as much as 1,600%, not the 1,200% I previously stated. The script length difference would be entirely inconsequential.
Contrast your suggestion versus the following alternative points:
Designing a gender specified version:
1. Requires at least 200% more time to build. Even if the script can be changed by a simple "find and replace" operation - which, even if it can, it can't, because I still have to go through it line by line to verify, which takes just as much time and energy - I still have to actually record and then build two or more programs instead of one.
2. That is time I could be using to build something else or do more research and development.
3. Gender specified potentially leaves out bisexuals.
Subliminal Audio Specialist & Administrator
The scientist has a question to find an answer for. The pseudo-scientist has an answer to find a question for. ~ "Failure is the path of least persistence." - Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ Logic left. Emotion right. But thinking, straight ahead. ~ Sperate supra omnia in valorem. (The value of trust is above all else.) ~ Meowsomeness!
The scientist has a question to find an answer for. The pseudo-scientist has an answer to find a question for. ~ "Failure is the path of least persistence." - Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ Logic left. Emotion right. But thinking, straight ahead. ~ Sperate supra omnia in valorem. (The value of trust is above all else.) ~ Meowsomeness!