(05-18-2021, 07:55 AM)Raykon Wrote: The new description page is done, I believe he took it down because the pre order is over, and the new program is almost out. In the future he should keep the orders up but have the price (regular price) instead of removing the page completely, possibly preventing people from searching & buying it.

(05-18-2021, 07:43 AM)fab10 Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 07:14 AM)TugaInVegas Wrote: I don't know if it's on purpose or not, but the OFV3 page is down, so you're probably missing out on some orders.

It could mean that Shannon is writing the final description page which in turn would mean… that we are getting OF3 today!   

(I cannot start using it yet but I am vicariously excited for everyone else  )

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: This is fucking ridiculous.

(05-18-2021, 12:27 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: This is fucking ridiculous.

Basically.

Look, how about we just skip the extra work for you, and added delay for us, and release it now with said instructions. Gets it over with.

We both know there will always be a portion of people who won't do the recommended loops anyway. So let's just get this out there and go with it with the instructions.

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 07:55 AM)Raykon Wrote: The new description page is done, I believe he took it down because the pre order is over, and the new program is almost out. In the future he should keep the orders up but have the price (regular price) instead of removing the page completely, possibly preventing people from searching & buying it.

(05-18-2021, 07:43 AM)fab10 Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 07:14 AM)TugaInVegas Wrote: I don't know if it's on purpose or not, but the OFV3 page is down, so you're probably missing out on some orders.

It could mean that Shannon is writing the final description page which in turn would mean… that we are getting OF3 today!   

(I cannot start using it yet but I am vicariously excited for everyone else  )

I took it down to work on it and finish everything for publication.  Only this day has gone so far to hell that it's 4:13 PM and I am JUST NOW getting a chance to start working, and I'm pretty much either going to be wired as hell on caffeine to do this, or it's not getting done because I'm mentally and emotionally exhausted already.  This has been one hell of a bad da so far and this not getting done is definitely not making it better.

If after today I can't get it done, I'm probably just going to release it with instructions on how to figure it out for yourselves.  This is fucking ridiculous.

(05-18-2021, 12:31 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:27 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: This is fucking ridiculous.

Basically.

Look, how about we just skip the extra work for you, and added delay for us, and release it now with said instructions. Gets it over with.

We both know there will always be a portion of people who won't do the recommended loops anyway. So let's just get this out there and go with it with the instructions.

I couldn't do that even if I wanted to.  Ben hasn't linked it up yet because I wasn't finished.  I'll have him link it regardless, but it's going to take some time either way.  In the mean time, I'll keep trying, but at this point I suspect something or someone is trying to prevent me from releasing this, and I'm sick of the crap.

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: ...I'm probably just going to release it with instructions on how to figure it out for yourselves.  This is fucking ridiculous.

(05-18-2021, 12:31 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:27 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: This is fucking ridiculous.

Basically.

Look, how about we just skip the extra work for you, and added delay for us, and release it now with said instructions. Gets it over with.

We both know there will always be a portion of people who won't do the recommended loops anyway. So let's just get this out there and go with it with the instructions.

I couldn't do that even if I wanted to.  Ben hasn't linked it up yet because I wasn't finished.  I'll have him link it regardless, but it's going to take some time either way.  In the mean time, I'll keep trying, but at this point I suspect something or someone is trying to prevent me from releasing this, and I'm sick of the crap.

(05-18-2021, 12:39 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:31 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:27 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: This is fucking ridiculous.

Basically.

Look, how about we just skip the extra work for you, and added delay for us, and release it now with said instructions. Gets it over with.

We both know there will always be a portion of people who won't do the recommended loops anyway. So let's just get this out there and go with it with the instructions.

I couldn't do that even if I wanted to.  Ben hasn't linked it up yet because I wasn't finished.  I'll have him link it regardless, but it's going to take some time either way.  In the mean time, I'll keep trying, but at this point I suspect something or someone is trying to prevent me from releasing this, and I'm sick of the crap.

These things happen. I believe it's a good thing, here's why...

I think I know what's wrong:

Since it's such a new program, such new technology, so far beyond AOL's level, the models can't even fully quantify what they're dealing with. Like asking a fish to compare a tricycle to a Ducati. So getting a reliable number isn't feasible. That's my view. I've had similar issues in business at times. Sounds like your models need to be built out a bit more to reflect the new potency. This is a very good sign of progress I believe. I bet that's the problem, Shannon. Try to relax, it's more indication of a large step forward here!

(05-18-2021, 01:00 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:39 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:31 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:27 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:15 PM)Shannon Wrote: This is fucking ridiculous.

Basically.

Look, how about we just skip the extra work for you, and added delay for us, and release it now with said instructions. Gets it over with.

We both know there will always be a portion of people who won't do the recommended loops anyway. So let's just get this out there and go with it with the instructions.

I couldn't do that even if I wanted to.  Ben hasn't linked it up yet because I wasn't finished.  I'll have him link it regardless, but it's going to take some time either way.  In the mean time, I'll keep trying, but at this point I suspect something or someone is trying to prevent me from releasing this, and I'm sick of the crap.

These things happen. I believe it's a good thing, here's why...

I think I know what's wrong:

Since it's such a new program, such new technology, so far beyond AOL's level, the models can't even fully quantify what they're dealing with. Like asking a fish to compare a tricycle to a Ducati. So getting a reliable number isn't feasible. That's my view. I've had similar issues in business at times. Sounds like your models need to be built out a bit more to reflect the new potency. This is a very good sign of progress I believe. I bet that's the problem, Shannon. Try to relax, it's more indication of a large step forward here!

I actually think the problem is slightly different.  I think it boils down to the following things:

1. Based on the models giving me answers that don't qualify as "unstable", but also don't qualify as "stable" - which I have never seen before in the 15+ years I have been using them - I suspect there is some sort of interference from my subconscious or someone or something else attempting to inject "noise" into and interrupt the answers to this sequence of questioning to delay or prevent the release.
2. This generation of tech is so far from what we had before that I have no idea what parameters are reasonable to even use to run through the models to find the best usage patterns.  I've had to do my best to make educated guesses on that.  I'm sure if the answers I got were wrong, we will figure it out through adjusting as necessary.

I'm just really tired of and frustrated with a lot of things right now that are slowing me down, holding me back, delaying progress, killing success, etc. and which are either out of my hands or happening for stupid reasons.

(05-18-2021, 01:07 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 01:00 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:39 PM)CatMan Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:31 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-18-2021, 12:27 PM)CatMan Wrote: Basically.

Look, how about we just skip the extra work for you, and added delay for us, and release it now with said instructions. Gets it over with.

We both know there will always be a portion of people who won't do the recommended loops anyway. So let's just get this out there and go with it with the instructions.

I couldn't do that even if I wanted to.  Ben hasn't linked it up yet because I wasn't finished.  I'll have him link it regardless, but it's going to take some time either way.  In the mean time, I'll keep trying, but at this point I suspect something or someone is trying to prevent me from releasing this, and I'm sick of the crap.

These things happen. I believe it's a good thing, here's why...

I think I know what's wrong:

Since it's such a new program, such new technology, so far beyond AOL's level, the models can't even fully quantify what they're dealing with. Like asking a fish to compare a tricycle to a Ducati. So getting a reliable number isn't feasible. That's my view. I've had similar issues in business at times. Sounds like your models need to be built out a bit more to reflect the new potency. This is a very good sign of progress I believe. I bet that's the problem, Shannon. Try to relax, it's more indication of a large step forward here!

I actually think the problem is slightly different.  I think it boils down to the following things:

1. Based on the models giving me answers that don't qualify as "unstable", but also don't qualify as "stable" - which I have never seen before in the 15+ years I have been using them - I suspect there is some sort of interference from my subconscious or someone or something else attempting to inject "noise" into and interrupt the answers to this sequence of questioning to delay or prevent the release.
2. This generation of tech is so far from what we had before that I have no idea what parameters are reasonable to even use to run through the models to find the best usage patterns.  I've had to do my best to make educated guesses on that.  I'm sure if the answers I got were wrong, we will figure it out through adjusting as necessary.

I'm just really tired of and frustrated with a lot of things right now that are slowing me down, holding me back, delaying progress, killing success, etc. and which are either out of my hands or happening for stupid reasons.

Sounds like we're on the same wavelength there with #2. Said differently, but seems the same idea.

So real-world testing will have to provide new modeling data for this gen, 5.75.7G at a minimum, in order to have a new "best practises" config for modeling going forward. Maybe that info will provide a platform going forward that is accurate for modeling, or maybe new info will have to be added at each new step. Who knows, I suppose it depends on just how big the steps remaining end up being. The bigger the steps individually are, the more of a chance for modeling to become unstable again. Which makes sense as it goes out of bounds and can't fill in gaps to make a prediction past a certain point.

Like I said, this is good news regardless. It means the programs have outgrown the old config for the models. Fantastic. That's evolution. We'll straighten out your models with new real-world data with this gen to fill in the gaps and get them accurate again. No problem. It's progress, it's very good news.

Don't stress, this is a positive! Ben will link us up in time, for now, you sit back and play with the dogs and gorge on your steak, lol . We'll get that new data for you.

Shannon Wrote:Alright, I dosed up on a nice fat dose of caffeine and then I sat down and had a little talk with myself. I said, "If any part of me is trying to delay, interrupt, derail, resist and or otherwise slow down my release of this program (OFv3), you need to understand that it's absolutely going to be released regardless of what you do. I'm going to try to get an answer from the models again, and if I don't, I'm just going to release it with instructions on how they can find the right answer for themselves. It's going out, and that's not going to change. So if some part of me is interrupting, stop. It's pointless, because this program will be published regardless."

Then I proceeded to get answers to the questions I asked that were clearer and had higher confidence ratings than anything I have gotten in the last several days, and it took about what it usually takes when there's no issues. Hopefully that means we have accurate answers now. So we have that now, and all we need to do is wait for Ben to link them up and publish it.

That said... I also don't know how accurate these answers are because I'm not sure what a reasonable range of options to ask about is for this big of a jump from what we have ever seen before, so it's possible that the best answer is outside any of the ranges I asked about. I think that's unlikely, but it's still possible.

OF v3 has an ASRB of 120. (60 minutes of audio, no silence.) That was VERY unexpected. I was expecting something like 1 minute of audio to 1+ minutes of silence. But it makes some sense if the program is only used for 1 loop per day on, and that's what the models indicated. The full usage patterns that emerged from the models were as follows:

1 loop per day on, 2 days on and 3 days off, use the program for 6 months straight.

I need everyone to report on their experiences in their journals so that we can see how well this answer works, and if so, make adjustments.

Please remember the following two points:

1. Do not use Hybrid until you're familiar for at least a month of usage per format with how Ultrasonic and/or Masked affect you. Hybrid is a complete unknown right now. I don't know if it is overload or not. We need to understand how Masked and or Ultrasonic format work before anyone tries Hybrid, so that I know how to interpret the results you guys get from Hybrid.

2. Do not use this program any other way than instructed for AT LEAST 14 days, and ONLY change from instructions if there is a good reason you absolutely need to. Then and only then should you make changes to the instructed usage patterns. Don't change formats for at least a month. If you find that you need to change the instructed usage patterns, ask for help and we will try to find the best options together. I'll be glad to help and offer whatever support I can on this.

And finally, please don't have expectations. Let this program and this new technology gen show you what it can do without them. That will give us all the most accurate idea of what it is actually doing.

Thank you everyone who has supported me on this, and everyone for their patience in this matter. We should be publishing later today.

Now if you will excuse me, there's a nice thick ribeye steak out there with my name on it.

Enjoy, everybody. I look forward to the reports.