Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Printable Version +- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com) +-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW) +--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals) +--- Thread: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 (/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Discussion-Volume-3) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
|
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Raz - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 06:41 AM)Mr. Anderson Wrote: Your filename doesn't match. Instead of bracets you have got %28 and %29 in the filename. This is because of different charset. If you replace %28 with "(" and %29 with ")" your MD5 should match again, as filenames are part of the whole MD5 sum. If it then still doesn't match then the files are broken. Just for the sake of completeness: the filename is independent of the md5sum. Or to make this more correct: The md5sum of a file is not influenced by its filename. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - AlphaRomeo - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 05:11 AM)Jake2015 Wrote:(09-23-2018, 04:56 AM)Determined Wrote: If US/LM is in the new LTU 5.5G, would it be reasonable for customers of US/LM to receive a discount when purchasing LTU? C`mon guys. The less you want to pay for the sub, the less you consciously value it (which kinda sets your expectations on how much you get from it as well). I´m not saying that it should be priced ridiculously high either...but ask yourself how much do you value that sub? Several of other subs includes full blown smaller subs as well, but to my knowledge yet there is no discount for them for owners of those smaller sub(s) that are included in the "major" sub, why should it be the case now? Btw, I have UM/OP as well...but not asking for discount based on that (and I will buy LTU as well after 3 or 6 months of UM/OP). EDIT: As for paying for the same thing twice. Not the case...there is great post by Shannon somewhat recently that I don´t have time to find now, where he states the differences between focus fire/small subs, and subs that has others subs in them. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-22-2018, 05:00 PM)findingme Wrote: Shannon, It's going to be that whatever you are currently working on and working through is going to make itself known at a conscious level through your feelings, choices, actions, reactions, etc. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-22-2018, 09:14 PM)Broski Wrote: Hey Shannon, I'm telling you guys what I am TRYING to include in it. It may not be possible to include all that in one program. I therefore don't yet know what will end up being in it, and I can't make suggestions. LTU is likely going to be out after DMSI 3.3. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 01:15 AM)Ricardo Wrote:(09-20-2018, 03:43 AM)CatMan Wrote: [quote='Roy' pid='206029' dateline='1537441279'] Of course you have to echo this. You and CatMan have much the same issue and reasons for why you're still in the positions you find yourselves in, so you agree with each other. You can't get past your fears and the limiting beliefs that "protect you" from them (and hold those fears in place), so you conclude that the program is faulty, the design is faulty, it's too ambitious, etc. We already know DMSI "works". It just does not work as intended yet. If it didn't work, nobody would have achieved the design goals. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 01:51 AM)Jake2015 Wrote: @Shannon I don't really care when you listen, as long as it's consistent and contiguous. But think about what it means that UMOP disrupts your sleep. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 04:56 AM)Determined Wrote: If US/LM is in the new LTU 5.5G, would it be reasonable for customers of US/LM to receive a discount when purchasing LTU? USLM being included in LTU doesn't change the fact that LTU is not USLM. It's got UMOP in it, but it's not UMOP. This program includes those titles, but is not those titles. It is something completely different. You are not paying for the same thing twice. They are entirely different programs, and they do very different things. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 05:24 AM)Darwin Wrote: Hi Shannon, it was great to read what’s intended for LTU. Just to reiterate, the cognitive enhancements from MLS are really useful. Overcoming resistance, working harder, learning the tools for development are all much harder when your brain is just not functioning/you’re a little too dumb to let unconscious instruction be executed. I have to verify that everything I want to put in it already, will actually work as a group of additions. I have some indications that I can't put all that in it and have it work. I have to know what's going to make it in before I know what a reasonable price range is, and then I have to run the options within that range through the models. As for a discount, I haven't gotten that far yet. I don't know. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 09-23-2018 (09-22-2018, 03:07 PM)DarthXedonias Wrote:(09-22-2018, 01:09 PM)Shannon Wrote:(09-22-2018, 12:43 PM)Wharrgarbl Wrote: Shannon I don't know when it will be out. Probably after DMSI 3.3. That's all I know right now. Quote:Also, for when you come out with 3.3 B side will you be putting in thing to help deal with the "scorch earth" response? I ask because that was the most horrible part when I ran 3.2 B. It was like everything that could go wrong in my life went wrong and my mental state was constantly one negative emotion after another with no let up. Just hoping something will be done about that. I have plans to deal with that, yes. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Jake2015 - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 09:21 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-23-2018, 01:51 AM)Jake2015 Wrote: @Shannon awesome and awesome again cos I get it I think if im correct what it means is that its resistance thus give it time to work and it will hopefully break through my resistance thanks mate RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shawn - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 06:48 AM)Raz Wrote:(09-23-2018, 06:41 AM)Mr. Anderson Wrote: Your filename doesn't match. Instead of bracets you have got %28 and %29 in the filename. This is because of different charset. If you replace %28 with "(" and %29 with ")" your MD5 should match again, as filenames are part of the whole MD5 sum. If it then still doesn't match then the files are broken. Hmm...that's strange, because I got the correct hash after renaming the file on my phone in the way I described. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Raz - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 10:04 AM)Mr. Anderson Wrote:(09-23-2018, 06:48 AM)Raz Wrote:(09-23-2018, 06:41 AM)Mr. Anderson Wrote: Your filename doesn't match. Instead of bracets you have got %28 and %29 in the filename. This is because of different charset. If you replace %28 with "(" and %29 with ")" your MD5 should match again, as filenames are part of the whole MD5 sum. If it then still doesn't match then the files are broken. It is possible to include external metadata like filename, timestamp, permissions, etc. into the hash calculation using the MD5 algorithm per se. If calculated that way changing the filename (or other metadata) would change the calculated hash value. BUT: Shannon is using the software md5sum (take a look at any hashvalue.txt for subliminals have near by - the content is a terminal printout showing the execution of a command with said software), which explicitly does not include external metadata of a file when calculating the hash value. Thus the hash values that Shannon provides us with don't change when we alter the metadata (filename, permissions, timestamps) of those files. Unless your software alters the file as well in some way. Which is why we get the hash values in the first place edit: Container-specific metadata such as ID3 tags on the other hand are stored in the file itself, so I guess the hash values will change, when you edit this kind of metadata. But I haven't tested that myself, so this is more of an educated guess. RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Darwinn - 09-23-2018 Thanks Shannon. LTU 5g alone was a life changing sub. Any upgrade will be undoubtedly worth while RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - blth - 09-23-2018 (09-23-2018, 09:20 AM)Shannon Wrote:(09-23-2018, 01:15 AM)Ricardo Wrote:(09-20-2018, 03:43 AM)CatMan Wrote: [quote='Roy' pid='206029' dateline='1537441279'] Hey in my free time i am reading some journals from the beginning. I was looking at BASE journals mainly and i have bookmarked/started some DMSI's Can you point out 1-2 male journals that you think people are executing the design goals? Thanks |